Abruzzo v. City of Park Ridge: Supreme Court to the rescue!By Stephen I. LaneApril 2009Since the Tort Immunity Act was passed in the mid-1960s, governmental agencies have, in many ways, enjoyed a collective lack of accountability for injuries caused by their agents and employees.
Appellate court rejects prescribed means exception to natural accumulation doctrineBy John J. HolevasDecember 2009In Reed v. Galaxy Holdings, Inc., 2009 WL 2590089 (1st Dist., Aug. 20, 2009), the First District Appellate Court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the defendant, rejecting adoption of the “prescribed means” exception to the common law natural accumulation doctrine.
Choice of law in multi-state tort casesBy Jeffrey A. ParnessJanuary 2009Gregory v. Beazer East provides a useful reminder of basic choice-of-law principles, including depecage and the “factual contacts” test.
Complicity Doctrine revisited: New Dram Shop instructions and moreBy Stephen C. BuserNovember 2009The affirmative defense of complicity often presents an insurmountable hurdle for a plaintiff who has filed an action under the Illinois Liquor Control Act, more commonly known as the Dram Shop Act.
Costs of taking evidence deposition of out-of-state physician properly awardedBy John E. ThiesApril 2009In Peltier v. Collins, a unanimous Second District panel held that the trial court properly awarded the costs of the court reporter and videographer incurred by plaintiffs in obtaining the evidence deposition of an out-of-state physician.
eDiscovery issues: Authenticating e-mail produced in discoveryBy Scott A. Carlson & Jay C. CarleDecember 2009This is the first in a series of articles about electronic discovery or “eDiscovery.” eDiscovery means a lot of different things to a lot of different people and each article will take on some discrete aspect of eDiscovery.
Ensuring fairness in Illinois Whistleblower Act claimsBy Stuart Chanen & Chris StetlerJuly 2009In an effort to fight fraud, the Illinois Whistleblower Reward and Protection Act allows private parties to bring lawsuits on behalf of the State. But what should the State do when those private parties abuse that power by bringing claims that are without merit?
First District limits liability of snow removal contractorsBy Stephen C. BuserFebruary 2009The First District Illinois Appellate Court has been busy for the last several years deciding when snow removal contractors may or may not be liable for claims arising from work performed involving the removal, pushing, and/or piling of snow.
How judges influence advocacyBy Patrick M. Flaherty & Patrick M. KinnallyFebruary 2009When judicial action is appropriate, it should be tempered with recognition that action carries consequences and that even routine practices can impact an impressionable jury.
Jury instruction updateBy Hon. Barbara CrowderDecember 2009Grammar enthusiasts take note. And you all know who you are—a misplaced apostrophe bothers you. You worry about the use of commas in a series and secretly believe that final comma should still be used before the “and” even though modern rules do not require it.
Jury instruction updateBy Hon. Barbara CrowderNovember 2009Three new jury instructions were revised in September 2009.
Making evidence meaningfulBy Hon. Barbara CrowderMay 2009Some suggestions and observations to make evidence more meaningful.
Motion in Limine Reduces Trial PrejudiceBy Terrence K. Hegarty & Jessica A. HegartyMay 2009A pretrial motion in limine must be prepared and argued before the voir dire begins, and a written order memorializing the court’s rulings on each issue must be entered.
Obtaining deposition testimony from witnesses abroad: A primer for Illinois lawyersBy Timothy J. Chorvat & Jill M. HutchisonJune 2009In seeking discovery from non-parties who are located outside the United States, the greatest limitations an attorney is likely to face will be restrictions imposed by the jurisdiction in which the deponent is located.
OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS: The Demise of IPI 105.01By Susan M. BrazasMay 2009“That is for you to decide” appears at the end of IPI 10.01 (the definition of negligence as to an adult), IPI 10.02 (the definition of ordinary care for an adult), and IPI 10.05 (the definition of ordinary care for a minor).
People v. Illinois Commerce Commission: Deadline for E-filing under Illinois Commerce Commission’s regulationsBy Laura L. MilnichukMarch 2009In the recent Illinois Supreme Court decision of People v. Illinois Commerce Commission, the Court considered the question of whether the Illinois Commerce Commission’s regulations require documents to be electronically filed before the close of business in order to constitute timely filings and provide the appellate court with jurisdiction to hear any subsequent appeal.
Scrivener be aware: Attention to detail is essential in vendor’s endorsementsBy Hon. James Fitzgerald Smith & Julia Illman ManessFebruary 2009A recent opinion by the Illinois appellate court, First District, Fifth Division, reminds us that attention to detail when drafting a vendor’s endorsement in an insurance contract is of utmost importance.
Time is of the essence, or is it?By John B. KincaidOctober 2009Two recent Rule 23 Orders decided by separate panels of the Second District Appellate Court appear to conflict as to whether a court can limit the cross-examination of a witness or the submission of evidence which supports the litigant’s case.
When is a credit card agreement an oral contract? Portfolio Acquisitions LLC v. FeltmanBy Hon. Daniel T. Gillespie & Kathilynne GrotelueschenNovember 2009 In Illinois, where the statute of limitations is ten years for a written contract and five years for an oral contract, one might well think that a credit card agreement would qualify as a written contract because credit cards are generally issued pursuant to a written card member agreement.