"Nathan was amazing! He was kind knowledgeable and most importantly responsive! He directly answered my questions and was able to help me reach an outcome that ultimately was a win for me." -Ashley W.

"I have collaborated with Mr. Hakimi on many occasions and I highly regard his professionalism and quality of work." -Atty. Joseph Younes

"Nathan Hakimi [...] was quick to respond to all of our inquiries, and helped us navigate a daunting legal quagmire. Would recommend him to a friend." -Miles K.

"I reached out to Mr. Hakimi and it was the best decision I ever made [...] Having him in my corner allowed me a great level of assurance and confidence and his advice proved to be invaluable." -Vivian S.

"Nathan Hakimi has been the consummate professional." -Moishe R.

"I have used Nathan Hakimi for real estate closings both as the buyer and the seller. In both cases, he provided excellent, responsive service and the closings occurred without any issues." -Joan H.

"I have worked with Nathan on several cases, always a pleasure to collaborate with." -Atty. Michael Fus

"Nathan was instrumental in advising me and guiding me through the legal process. He explained the relevant laws in a clear and accessible way, which gave me the confidence to assert my rights." -Eli S.

"Before contacting Nathan, I contacted 7 different law firms and no one wanted to help with my case. But after I called Nathan, we scheduled consultation the next day, and my case was resolved in 2 weeks." -Denys H.

Decalogue Tablets, "Jewish Court": What Does it Do? Fall 2024, pp. 12-13. Link PDF

Decalogue Tablets, Judgment on the Pleadings, Spring 2025, pp. 17-18. Link PDF

CKJIP Blog, The Status of Software Patents in the Post-Alice Era, Nov. 20, 2016. Link

CKJIP Blog, IP Trolls in a Pirates’ World, Mar. 26, 2017. Link

Brandeis JAEL, Monkey Business, Fall 2017, pp. 1-22. Link PDF

Commercial Litigation

Business & Small Business

Partnership + Entity Formation

Trust / Fiduciary Breach

Real Property Disputes

Professional Malpractice

Professional Malpractice: A patient at Evanston Hospital sustained irreversible vision loss due to failure to control intracranial pressure during a meningitis infection. A downstate Illinois ophthalmologist neglected to recognize a displaced lens following cataract surgery, after numerous complaints by the patient of pain following the surgery. These cases are both in the midst of litigation by CorePoint Law LLC as lead counsel on behalf of the plaintiffs.

Restrictive Covenants: two employees left their brokerage to start a competitor in produce trucking logistics. Their company aggressively pursued them for violations of noncompete, nondisclosure, and nonsolicit covenants. After refuting the accusations of their having solicited former clients and the alleged damages sustained as a result, they gained an agreement to become free to operate immediately (despite a 2-year noncompete term), and remitted less than half the demanded settlement payment.

Partnership Disassociation: an Atlanta woman joined a Chicago tech startup remotely, on the basis of a 33% share. She worked fulltime for two years with no salary, when the founder requested from her to gratuitously dilute her share to 25% to free up stake for more investors. She refused. The founder summarily terminated her and extinguished her share. CorePoint Law LLC is representing her for partnership breach.

Breach of Contract: an MD/NP couple and a cosmetologist agreed to form a new entity so the latter could offer botox, radio frequency, microneedling, and other treatments requiring a medical supervisor. The negotiation fell through, but she kept $30,000 of prepayment advanced by the MD/NP couple toward the partnership, while continuing to offer medical treatments off-label. She was difficult to serve and refused to show up in court, until CorePoint Law threatened to and nearly defaulted her, when she hired an attorney. Litigation is pending.

Landlord-Tenant: a CPD officer purchased an apartment building, to live in and rent the other units. When an existing tenant's lease was over, he withheld the $1700 security deposit due to significant plumbing damage. The tenant sued the old and new landlords, claiming not only the deposit, but statutory damages under the Chicago Residential-Tenant Ordinance. CorePoint Law succeeded at proving, over denials, that the officer was an "owner-occupant" not subject to CRLTO, so he was able to settle the deposit claim without additional statutory damages.

Property Dispute: in two very similar cases, an ex-husband/ex-wife, and a father/son, respectively, got into litigation where a residential property had been purchased legally by one party, but the other claimed to own half or all of it for underlying factors denied by the defendant(s). CorePoint Law represented the defendants in both cases, settling both in favor of the defendant(s) retaining exclusive ownership over the properties themselves, while paying reasonable monetary settlements.

Contract Review: on behalf of doctors, IT professionals, real estate investors, landlords, tenants, employers, employees, and others, CorePoint Law LLC has performed contract review and drafting, including negotiation of monetary and structural terms, review for enforceability and legality in relevant jurisdictions, optimization for terms anticipated to be relevant, and - when necessary - advising as to rights and obligations in pending disputes.

Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Three sisters sued U.S. Bank for breaching its fiduciary duties as trustee with regard to two real properties held in trust left by their grandfather. They allege the bank did not maintain the properties, either physically or in terms of rental value, did not utilize appropriate management and repair staff, and cost them over $150,000 in code remediation and eviction fees, renovation costs, and lost rental profits. U.S. Bank's motion to dismiss was defeated and the case remains ongoing.

LLC v. LLP v. Corp.: An individual, group, or pair may "incorporate" as any number of available legal structures. Major examples include PC (Professional Corporation), LLC (Limited Liability Company), S-Corp (S-Chapter Corporation), as well as LLP (Limited Liability Partnership). The difference in what kind of structure you are - or intend to be - has different implications, the usual important ones being: taxation, liability, and organization. CorePoint does not handle tax, nor bankruptcy, issues of law. But the processes for incorporation, operating and shareholder agreements, and personal liability to individual members or partners are some of the most frequent issues that arise in business litigation. Whether you are starting a new company or already have an existing one, CorePoint can help you understand the legal implications of your entity type.

Tort v. Contract: A "tort," historically, is a civil violation between one party and another of general rights and duties. For example, people may not knowingly interfere with each other's business or economic relations, may not defame each other's reputation, and must fulfill the heightened standards that apply as professionals. Contracts are not general/public duties, but a local set of obligations between parties which may be enforced if breached. Torts are negligent (or intentional) violations of general duties. Both tort and contract lawsuits involve a breach of rights causing damages, the difference being what kind of rights have been violated, and what kind of damages may be available (restitutive, emotional, punitive, statutory, compensatory, etc.).

Appeal & Precedent: Trial courts are bound to hold by precedents set in previous cases ruled upon in an Appellate or Supreme Court. Judicial decisions made in the trial court are not globally precedential. If an appeal is taken from a trial court decision, it means the application of law to the trial proceedings is being challenged. The appellate court may: a) overrule or affirm the lower court decision, which then reverses or affirms the decision made in your case, and in so doing b) creates a decision which becomes precedent to cases in the future. The decision to take an appeal is relevant when a client feels that a different result should have been reached, and the challenged application of law has potential to become the basis of new trial court decisions in the future.

M-Th: 9am-6pm

Fri: 9am-Sunset

Sat.: Closed

Sun.: 12-5pm