On Oct. 27, 2023, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that Illinois does not recognize a common-law peer-review privilege, but the Illinois reporter’s privilege statutes protect academic journals from disclosing their sources.
The Illinois General Assembly amended the Code of Civil Procedure so that whenever the defendant in any litigation in Illinois has the right to demand a physical or mental examination of the plaintiff in a civil lawsuit, the plaintiff has the right to designate an additional person to be present and video record the examination.
There are pitfalls for attorneys who assume that a privilege follows whenever client communications are preceded simply by promises to maintain confidences.
Unclear Seventh Circuit precedent and conflicting district court opinions have left unresolved whether corporate financial information is discoverable in relation to a punitive-damages claim in federal court.
Under the discovery rule, does the clock start when the harm is discovered or when a plaintiff discovers that the harm was "wrongfully caused"? The first district held that the former is more correct.
Default judgments and dismissals with prejudice should only result from persistent misconduct and after less onerous enforcement options and warnings have failed.
Google Maps, Google Street View, and similar internet services allow parties to access images of a particular location without ever being physically present at the site. Are such images admissible? How do the Rules of Evidence interact with these new discovery resources? This article examines how such issues may arise during litigation.
Yes, you can depose a corporation, and Illinois Supreme Court Rule 206(a)(1) sets out the process. The bad news: Illinois courts have said little about the Rule. The good news: Plenty of federal rulings have interpreted FRCP 30(b)(6), the model upon which the Illinois rule is based.
Social media and the internet generally hold a trove of mission-critical information for lawyers about adversaries, businesses, and more - and most of it is free. Do you know how to find it?
The Illinois Appellate Court adopted a new standard in People v. Kent for admitting social media evidence. Here's a review of the standard and advice about how to apply it.
For plaintiffs who need to identify defendants before suing for damages - or, perhaps, hope to "out" or shame them - Illinois Supreme Court Rule 224 can be an option. But despite a few decisions interpreting the rule, the law remains uncertain.
This bill would amend the Code of Civil Procedure to update certain discovery provisions. It has passed through both chambers and was sent to the governor for action on June 18, 2015.
By Gabriel Reilly-Bates, Richard Y. Hu, & Claire E. Brennan
October
2014
Article
, Page 480
New Illinois Supreme Court rule amendments require parties to weigh the costs and benefits of ESI discovery, among other important changes. Here's a review.
Among other things, recent amendments to Illinois Supreme Court Rules 201 and 214 empower courts to tailor discovery if the burden of the request outweighs the benefit.
This little-known statute enables plaintiffs - but not defendants - to take discovery from a non-party respondent and provides a six-month "grace period" from statutes of limitations.
A recent case holds that if you don't conduct formal discovery in your divorce case, you may lose the right to reopen the judgment after it's entered, even to seek assets that weren't disclosed.
Proposals address financial disclosure in divorce, how judges describe defendants' decision not to testify, and how to handle inadvertent disclosure of documents.
This year's Allerton Conference focused on electronic evidence, spoliation, and other important topics not squarely addressed by Illinois' recent evidence-rules codification.
Litigants often seek protective orders to limit disclosure of clients' sensitive documents during discovery. But be wary of attempts by the requesting party to gain an unfair advantage.
Plaintiffs use requests to admit to establish the reasonableness of medical bills. A recent appellate case holds that defendants must either admit or deny the request or explain why they can't.
