Getting ‘put on papers:’ The case against informal support arrangementsBy Sherlyn SmithRacial and Ethnic Minorities and the Law, January 2019Despite the frustrations and inadequacies of the legally enforceable child support system, there are several substantial drawbacks to informal child support arrangements.
Getting to Know Jennifer LuczkowiakBy Margie Komes PutzlerWomen and the Law, September 2019A spotlight on Jennifer Luczkowiak, including her career path, biggest influences, and best advice to new lawyers.
Getting to know Maria M. L. SchwartzBy Kelly R. GiraudoWomen and the Law, June 2019A spotlight on Maria M. L. Schwartz, a new member of the Standing Committee on Women and the Law.
Good news columnWomen and the Law, April 2019Uplifting updates from various members of the Standing Committee on Women & the Law.
Good news columnWomen and the Law, February 2019Uplifting updates from various members of the Standing Committee on Women & the Law.
Grantor Trust Administration in Illinois: A Primer (Part 1)By Colleen L. SahlasTrusts and Estates, May 2019What to do when you represent the successor trustee of a grantor trust and the grantor has passed away, resigned, or been declared disabled for purposes of acting as trustee.
Grantor Trust Administration in Illinois: A Primer (Part 2)By Colleen L. SahlasTrusts and Estates, June 2019The second part of a three-part series outlining the role and duties of the acting successor trustee in Illinois trust administration of a self-declaration of trust where the grantor/settlor has become disabled or is deceased.
Grantor Trust Administration in Illinois: A Primer (Part 3)By Colleen L. Sahlas & Emily VivianTrusts and Estates, July 2019The third part of a three-part series outlining the role and duties of the acting successor trustee in Illinois trust administration of a self-declaration of trust where the grantor/settlor has become disabled or is deceased.
Has Missouri v. McNeely Been Overruled by Mitchell v. Wisconsin?By Larry A. DavisTraffic Laws and Courts, August 2019In Mitchell v. Wisconsin, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a Wisconsin statute providing for a warrantless blood draw from an unconscious DUI suspect is always constitutional, except in the rarest of circumstances, pursuant to the “exigent circumstances” exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.