Illinois consumers are the losers under a state Supreme Court decision exempting lawyers from a tough fraud law, says an attorney handling a lawsuit against a fellow attorney.

The court says the Consumer Fraud Act does not specifically mention lawyers, so it does not apply to them. Wrongdoing by lawyers can be addressed by the court's disciplinary process, legal malpractice claims or other lawsuits, the court said.

"I think it's a very sad day for Illinois consumers," said attorney Brad McMillan.

McMillan represents Roberta Cripe, who alleges that a Peoria lawyer who was managing her mother's estate overbilled the victim of Alzheimer's disease by thousands of dollars. The lawyer, Thomas Leiter of Peoria, denies the allegation.

McMillan said the lawsuit would go forward, but it will face a higher burden of proof and less opportunity for monetary damages. He had argued that the Consumer Fraud Act, although it does not cover actual legal work, does apply to attorneys' billing and other commercial activities.

But the court ruled the act does not cover even that.

"Historically, the regulation of attorney conduct in this state has been the prerogative of this court," Justice Michael Bilandic wrote for the court. "This court's regulatory scheme extends to the area of attorneys' fees."

But Justice Moses Harrison II filed a sharp dissent, noting that the law lists several exceptions. The assumption must be that everyone else - including lawyers - is covered by the law, he said.

"Holding attorneys to the same standards of honesty and fair dealing that apply to other business people will inevitably affect the practice of law. In my view, the results can only be positive," Harrison wrote.

One of Leiter's attorneys, Craig Unrath, said the ruling should be a big relief to lawyers. A decision the other way, he said, would have encouraged angry clients to sue under the Consumer Fraud Act, no matter what their claims really are.

"Any complaint ... has the capability of being framed in terms of the business aspect of law," Unrath said. "It would just be awful for the small practitioner."

But others saw it differently.

HALT, a Washington-based group that advocates legal reforms, complained that the court "missed a golden opportunity." HALT leaders promise to look for legislators willing to sponsor changes in the fraud law.