Admissibility of board certificationBy Karen McNulty EnrightJune 2000In medical malpractice cases we frequently find ourselves asking a physician whether or not they are board certified.
Co-editor’s noteBy John L. NisivacoNovember 2000The first article in this edition is by Timothy J. Cavanagh of Lloyd & Cavanagh in Chicago. Mr. Cavanagh examines the United States Supreme Court's decision in Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Shanklin.
Co-editor’s noteBy John L. NisivacoSeptember 2000This issue begins with a letter to the editor from Curt N. Rodin regarding Judge Barbara McDonald's article "Is Aggravation of a Pre-existing Condition a Separate Element of Damage?"
Co-editor’s noteBy John L. NisivacoJune 2000Our first article is written by the Honorable Barbara A. McDonald of the Circuit Court of Cook County.
Co-editor’s noteBy John L. NisivacoMay 2000This is a special edition of Tort Trends devoted solely to the subject of HMO liability.
Co-editor’s noteBy John L. NisivacoMarch 2000Our first article is written by Scott D. Lane and Joseph M. Dooley from Lane & Lane in Chicago.
HMO liability and the fiduciary duty of physiciansBy Daniel P. WurlMay 2000There has been a flurry of recent decisions by the appellate courts involving important issues relating to health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and the physicians who treat patients in HMOs in which the physicians have an ownership interest.
Letter to the editorSeptember 2000Judge Barbara McDonald takes the IPI Committee to task for inclusion of IPI 30.03 as a separate element of damage.
Proof future lost earningsBy Wayne O. SmithSeptember 2000Plaintiffs' lawyers are often faced with the dilemma of whether they have a sustainable case for future lost earnings.
Supervision immunity is no longer absoluteBy Darcy L. ProctorSeptember 2000For many years, governments have enjoyed absolute immunity for the failure to supervise an activity on public property.
Supreme Court hands victory to railroad industry in crossing caseBy Timothy J. CavanaghNovember 2000Earlier this year the United States Supreme Court handed down its much anticipated decision in the case of Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Shanklin, No. 99-312 (2000 U.S. Lexis 2519; April 17, 2000).
Using focus groups to prepare for trialBy Jeffrey J. KrollMarch 2000A focus group is typically composed of twelve individuals who are brought together for two to four hours to watch a short presentation of the case and discuss the various issues raised.
When can a party that is not a liquor licensee be liable under the Dramshop Act?By Kevin E. O’ReillySeptember 2000Recently the Third District ruled that a land trustee could not be held liable to an injured party under the Dramshop Act. 235 ILCS 5/6-21(a). Kulikowski v. Larson, 305 Ill. App. 3d 110, 710 N.E.2d 1275, 238 Ill. Dec. 173 (3rd Dist. 1999).