Jablonski v. Ford: Is the Illinois Supreme Court crafting a new approach to duty analysis and proof in negligent-product-design cases?By George S. Bellas & A. Patrick AndesBench and Bar, April 2012The Supreme Court’s transition from Callesto Jablonskisuggests that in negligent-product-design claims specifically and in products liability litigation generally, the Illinois Supreme Court may not yet be restricting duty analysis solely to the risk-utility test but has incorporated the consumer expectation test as a factor into the risk-utility test.
Liability for common bile duct injuries—Measure twice, cut onceBy William A. CirignaniTort Law, April 2008This article is designed to help someone new to bile-duct injury cases understand the medicine, and the theories of liability underlying such claims.
Tedrick v. Community Resource Center Inc. & the theory of transferred negligence in medical negligence actionsBy John J. DriscollCivil Practice and Procedure, January 2008In Tedrick v. Community Resource Center Inc., et al., the Fifth District Appellate Court recognized a legal duty in a medical negligence action based upon the theories of voluntary undertaking and transferred negligence where Plaintiff-decedent was killed by her mentally ill husband while he was under the psychiatric care of Defendant health care providers.