Hot Button Civil Evidence Issues: The 2011 Allerton ConferenceBy Jeffrey A. ParnessDecember 2011Article, Page 632This year's Allerton Conference focused on electronic evidence, spoliation, and other important topics not squarely addressed by Illinois' recent evidence-rules codification.
Evaluating Protective Orders for Discovery MaterialsBy Jo Anna PollockNovember 2011Article, Page 576Litigants 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.
Using Requests to Admit to Prove Medical ExpensesBy Christ S. StaceySeptember 2011Article, Page 456Plaintiffs 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.
Court-ordered mental health reports not confidential under IMDMABy Helen W. GunnarssonApril 2011Lawpulse, Page 174Unlike those issued by treating caregivers, mental-health reports ordered by the court under the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act are not confidential, the supreme court rules.
Who Posted That? Anonymous Online Speech and the First AmendmentBy Sarah A. SmithApril 2011Article, Page 194There's a trend in defamation litigation to use pre-suit discovery procedures to uncover the identities of anonymous online commenters. The author considers the implications.
The Power of Pre-Suit Discovery: Supreme Court Rule 224By Timothy J. HarrisMarch 2011Article, Page 136Pre-suit discovery under SCR 224 is a powerful and underused way to identify potential parties, investigate an incident, protect evidence, and avoid secondary spoliation claims.
Are courts cracking down on refusals to answer requests to admit?By Helen W. GunnarssonFebruary 2011Lawpulse, Page 66At least one lawyer thinks he sees a trend.
Requests to admit are powerful pretrial tools, as every litigator knows. But many courts are reluctant to enforce supreme court rules specifying that requests must be answered or deemed admitted and that wrongful denials trigger attorney-fee awards.
Berry and discovery depositions: hard cases make new rulesBy Helen W. GunnarssonJanuary 2011Lawpulse, Page 10The Illinois Supreme Court amends Rule 212 by expanding the permissible uses of discovery depositions to cases where the deponent is a party and has died before trial.
Nonparty Discovery Under the Federal Arbitration ActBy Mitchell L. Marinello and John Haarlow Jr.September 2010Article, Page 476The Federal Arbitration Act places sharp limits on a party's ability to obtain information from a nonparty, but it can be done. Here's a guide.
The Discovery Deposition and Disfavored EvidenceBy Joanne Hannaway Sweeney and Benjamin J. WimmerNovember 2009Article, Page 576A recent amendment to the Illinois Supreme Court Rules obscures the purpose of the discovery deposition and the range of its uses
Deposing a witness in a foreign countryBy Helen W. GunnarssonSeptember 2009Lawpulse, Page 438If you find yourself among the growing ranks of lawyers who need to conduct extraterritorial depositions, here's how to proceed.
Cross-Examination of Experts: Saving the Best for TrialBy Keith L. DavidsonFebruary 2009Article, Page 94A veteran litigator warns against revealing so much during discovery that you limit your ability to effectively cross-examine experts at trial.
Electronic Discovery: Dealing with Disclosure of MetadataBy Joseph R. MarconiJanuary 2009Article, Page 24The question isn't whether confidential client information will be disclosed during electronic discovery but what to do when it happens.
Subpoena for medical recordsJanuary 2009Illinois Law Update, Page 16On October 31, 2008, the Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District, reversed the judgment of the Circuit Court of Logan County denying the state's request for a subpoena duces tecum, seeking release of a defendant's medical records for the day the defendant was charged with driving under the influence (DUI).
Depositions of Gravely Ill Illinois ClaimantsBy Professor Jeffrey A. ParnessSeptember 2008Column, Page 476 A majority inBerry found that while the trial court ruled correctly the system failed.
Fees for Physician Testimony: What's Reasonable?By Timothy J. HarrisSeptember 2008Article, Page 460A look at the governing rules, along with common-sense ways lawyers can keep doctors from charging too much for testifying.
No discovery deps allowedBy Helen W. GunnarssonAugust 2008Lawpulse, Page 384A recent case underscores the importance of taking a party's evidence - not discovery - deposition if he or she may die before trial.
Clients behaving badlyBy Helen W. GunnarssonMay 2008Lawpulse, Page 230When a client or witness spins out of control during a hearing or deposition, is doing nothing a safe route?
Duty to disclose triggered by written interrogatories onlyMarch 2008Illinois Law Update, Page 124On December 26, 2007, the Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District, reversed the holding of the Circuit Court of Sangamon County and remanded for renewed discovery and trial proceedings.
No psych-record access for "garden variety" employee emotional distress claimsBy Helen W. GunnarssonFebruary 2008Lawpulse, Page 66A recent ruling explains when employer-defendants can and cannot get access to employee-plaintiffs' medical and psychological records when employees sue for emotional distress cause by illegal discrimination.
Contacting, deposing employees of opposing parties: a how-toBy Helen W. GunnarssonJanuary 2008Lawpulse, Page 10Don’t just call up your opponent’s employees, even if they’re working elsewhere. Consider first whether doing so might violate legal or ethical rules.
Rule 216 requests to admit: no more "gotcha" gamesBy Helen W. GunnarssonNovember 2007Lawpulse, Page 570With its Vision Point ruling, the Illinois Supreme Court gives trial courts the power to allow late or otherwise deficient answers to Rule 216 requests to admit.
Asked and AnsweredSeptember 2007Column, Page 496What do you do with uncooperative opposing counsel?
Oppositional depositions - telling your client not to answerBy Helen W. GunnarssonMay 2007Lawpulse, Page 230A recent federal case sheds light about when and how lawyers can counsel their clients to refuse to answer questions in a deposition.
