eDiscovery: A New Approach to Discovery in Federal and State CourtBy Scott A. Carlson and Ronald L. LipinskiApril 2007Article, Page 184Changes in technology have altered the way lawyers deal with evidence. The electronic-discovery amendments to the federal rules reflect these changes.
E-Discovery in Illinois Civil ActionsBy Professor Jeffrey A. ParnessMarch 2007Column, Page 150Wholesale adoption of federal discovery rules by Illinois State courts may be unwise.
Discovery rules changed for appeals of property assessments of over $1 millionDecember 2006Illinois Law Update, Page 650The Property Tax Appeal Board (Board) has added section 1910.79 and amended section 1910.95 of 86 Ill Adm Code 1910, effective September 29, 2006, in order to "streamline and expedite the appeal process" for appeals on property assessments of $1 million or more.
Coming soon: new federal e-discovery rulesBy Helen W. GunnarssonNovember 2006Lawpulse, Page 578Among other things, the amendments, effective December 1, allow routine purging of and address inadvertent disclosure of electronic data.
Strict compliance versus "substantial justice"By Helen W. GunnarssonOctober 2006Lawpulse, Page 518In deciding whether to give a party extra time to respond to a request to admit, can a court consider the other party's failure to comply with another rule? The first district says "yes."
Rule 222 -the high cost of noncomplianceBy Helen W. GunnarssonFebruary 2006Lawpulse, Page 62Plaintiffs who fail to heed the disclosure rule, which governs specified cases implicating $50,000 or less in damages, face the extinguishment of their claim.
Spoliation of Evidence: Responding to Fire Scene DestructionBy Gerald O. Sweeney Jr. and P. Russell PerdewJuly 2005Article, Page 358A look at the discovery, motion practice, and trial techniques defendants can use in response to destruction of a fire scene.
The Brave New World of Electronic Evidence DiscoveryBy R. Mark HalliganJune 2004Article, Page 296Most information is stored and sent electronically, but most litigators live in the peper-laden past. Here's an overview of e-discovery issues.
The Case for Allowing Expert Assistance at DepositionsBy Leon I. Finkel and Lena Goretsky WintersMarch 2004Article, Page 151The authors argue that courts should routinely allow attorneys to bring retained experts to help depose opponents.
Interrogatories: the numbers gameBy Helen W. GunnarssonDecember 2003Lawpulse, Page 594What if you're presented by an opponent with too many interrogatories, or what if you want to exceed the limits yourself? Here are some ideas.
Trial court's error in allowing improper and untimely answers to a Rule 216 request held as cause for a new trialOctober 2003Illinois Law Update, Page 492On June 30, 2003, the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, reversed and remanded the order of the Circuit Court of Cook County denying the defendant's motion to strike the plaintiffs' answers to requests for admissions submitted to them pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 216, 134 Ill.2d R. 216.
The power of special interrogatoriesBy Helen W. GunnarssonOctober 2002Lawpulse, Page 506They're a useful tool for the plaintiffs' bar as well as the defense, a trial lawyer says.
Striking the Right Balance: New Supreme Court Rule 213By Hon. Barbara A. McDonaldAugust 2002Article, Page 406While not perfect, the newly amended version of Rule 213 should require adequate disclosure while reducing hypertechnical motions.
Defending the DepositionBy Maureen B. CollinsJuly 2002Column, Page 379Your job is to protect deponents from the undue influence of an overzealous opposing counsel; and from their own confusion and intimidation.
Taking the Deposition (and Getting it Right)By Maureen B. CollinsJune 2002Column, Page 323Remember that the responses you elicit in a deposition are likely to be only as good as the questions you ask.
Preparing to Take a DepositionBy Maureen B. CollinsMay 2002Column, Page 269The first of three articles addressing the skills you need to take and defend a deposition.
Rule 213 changes take effect July 1By Helen W. GunnarssonMay 2002Lawpulse, Page 226Litigators from both the plaintiffs' and defense bar like the amended rule's new three-class system for opinion witnesses: lay, independent expert, and controlled expert.
Write for Success in DiscoveryBy Maureen B. CollinsMarch 2002Column, Page 149Don't underestimate the importance of interrogatories and other forms of written discovery as a way to glean information that can strengthen your case.
A New, Improved Rule 213?By Helen W. GunnarssonFebruary 2002Lawpulse, Page 62Rule 213, introduced a few years ago to solve problems caused by old Rule 220, is causing problems of its own. The Supreme Court Rules Committee has proposed another fix for the rule governing admission of opinion testimony.