Supremes: the Best approach to tort reform survivesBy Helen W. GunnarssonAugust 2008Lawpulse, Page 384 The supreme court holds that a med-mal plaintiff is entitled to a 90-day extension to file her certificate of merit - and that a 2004 law didn't reenact the version of 2-622 invalidated in Best v Taylor.
A veterinary standard of careBy Helen W. GunnarssonJuly 2008Lawpulse, Page 334The court makes explicit that veterinarians are "skilled" practitioners of a "profession or trade" and thus owe a duty of care.
No discretionary immunity for retaliatory discharge of employeeJune 2008Illinois Law Update, Page 284On April 17, 2008, the Illinois Supreme Court reversed the circuit court's holding barring the plaintiff's retaliatory discharge claim against the Waukegan Park District due to the District's immunity under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act), 745 ILCS 10/1-101 et seq.
Successor Liability in IllinoisBy George W. KuneyMarch 2008Article, Page 148Find out when creditors and tort victims can sue the buyer of a business for the debts and torts of the seller.
No duty to warn, Illinois high court holdsBy Helen W. GunnarssonNovember 2007Lawpulse, Page 570The court reaffirms the rule that Party A has no duty to warn Party B about a threat posed by Party C unless there's a special relationship between A and B.
Judicial estoppel not applied to change in legal conclusionAugust 2007Illinois Law Update, Page 404On June 7, 2007, the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, reversed the Circuit Court of Lake County's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants Richard Sandore and Associates for Women's Health.
Land Surveyor Liability to Third Parties in IllinoisBy Richard F. BalesMarch 2007Article, Page 136The land surveyor made a mistake - what are the damages? The defenses? Who can recover? This article explores those questions from the plaintiffs' and defense perspectives.
Lawsuit challenges med-mal capsBy Helen W. GunnarssonJanuary 2007Lawpulse, Page 8The suit, filed in Cook County, argues that the statute violates the separation of powers, is impermissible special legislation, and suffers from other constitutional infirmities.