The Collateral Source Rule after Wills v FosterBy Jennifer L. Tweeton and Erin N. GrahamApril 2009Article, Page 184A review of the supreme court’s decision in Wills, which allows plaintiffs to recover the “reasonable” (i.e., undiscounted) value of their medical expenses, even if paid by Medicare or some other third party.
Undefined “death benefits” include life insurance proceedsJune 2008Illinois Law Update, Page 284On April 7, 2008, the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, affirmed the judgment of the Circuit Court of Winnebago County ordering life insurance proceeds to be delivered to the decedent's children, instead of the listed beneficiary.
Life insurance cannot be used to secure maintenance paymentsMarch 2008Illinois Law Update, Page 124On January 3, 2008, the Illinois Appellate Court, Third District, reversed the judgment of the circuit court requiring the respondent to designate his ex-wife Sandra as the beneficiary of his life insurance policy as security for his maintenance obligation.
Medicaid Planning in Illinois: Are You Ready for the DRA?By Kirsten IzattNovember 2007Article, Page 586The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 requires estate planners to devise new ways to protect the assets of clients who face long nursing-home stays. Illinois hasn't implemented the law, but it will.
New rules aim to reduce chance of erroneous license suspensionsJuly 2007Illinois Law Update, Page 348The Department of Transportation has amended its rules to make the policies of the Secretary of State consistent with those of the Division of Insurance and to ensure that drivers' licenses are not erroneously suspended. 92 Ill Adm Code 1070.20.
Basic “right to privacy” inherently includes interests of secrecy and seclusionFebruary 2007Illinois Law Update, Page 72On November 30, 2006, the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the decisions of the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, and the Circuit Court of McHenry County, granting summary judgment to the insured, Swiderski Electronics, Inc (Swiderski), and holding that the insurer, Valley Forge Insurance Company (Valley Forge), had a duty to defend a breach of privacy action brought against the insured.