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?
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.
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.
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.