Illinois Bar Journal
Articles on Witnesses

Expert testimony on airbag sensor system admissible if supported by proper foundation November 2002 Illinois Law Update, Page 584 On July 29, 2002, the Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District, affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court of Woodford County in this product liability case.
Defending the Deposition By Maureen B. Collins July 2002 Column, Page 379 Your job is to protect deponents from the undue influence of an overzealous opposing counsel; and from their own confusion and intimidation.
Court need not examine both the reliability of the methodology used and its general acceptance to conduct a proper Frye analysis for admissibility of novel scientific evidence May 2002 Illinois Law Update, Page 232 On February 22, 2002, the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court and held that a verdict in favor of plaintiffs and against a utility for toxic poisoning from exposure to coal tar resulting in children suffering from neuroblastoma was not subject to reversal.
Preparing to Take a Deposition By Maureen B. Collins May 2002 Column, Page 269 The first of three articles addressing the skills you need to take and defend a deposition.
Rule 213 changes take effect July 1 By Helen W. Gunnarsson May 2002 LawPulse, Page 226 Litigators 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.
A New, Improved Rule 213? By Helen W. Gunnarsson February 2002 LawPulse, Page 62 Rule 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.
Can we talk (to the other side’s employees)? By Helen W. Gunnarsson January 2002 LawPulse, Page 10 If you're suing a company that's represented by counsel, when can you talk directly to its employees?
Correspondence from Our Readers January 2002 Column, Page 6 Those clients from hell.
Expert Communication By Marianne Ley Hayek December 2001 Column, Page 661 How do you help your expert communicate more effectively? By communicating more effectively to your expert.
Discussing docs and deps By Helen W. Gunnarsson October 2001 LawPulse, Page 510 Members of an ISBA online discussion group warm to the subject of whether doctors charge too much for deposition fees.
Failure to give jury instruction on witness believability was an abuse of discretion when a police officer testified to material facts omitted from his written report October 2001 Illinois Law Update, Page 516 On August 16, 2001, the Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District, held that the trial court abused its discretion when it refused to accept the defendant's requested jury instruction on witness believability.
Correspondence from Our Readers September 2001 Column, Page 446 In defense of the common fund doctrine.
Defendant not required to pay costs of evidence deposition for physician who was unavailable to testify at trial or witness fees for medical professionals August 2001 Illinois Law Update, Page 398 On June 8, 2001, the Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District, reversed an award of certain costs against the defendant, Robert P. McMillan.
Mental-Health Professionals in Child-Custody Cases: Giving “Expert” Testimony Its Due By H. Joseph Gitlin July 2001 Article, Page 350 The testimony of mental-health professionals is often not scientific evidence, this author says.
Correspondence from Our Readers May 2001 Column, Page 222 The meaning of Phar-Mor    
Correspondence from Our Readers April 2001 Column, Page 162 Helping property taxpayers with reductions: not necessarily UPL?
Correspondence from Our Readers March 2001 Column, Page 110 Rule 213 not the answer.
New proposal to protect children who testify; S.B. 0027 March 2001 Illinois Law Update, Page 116 Under current Illinois law, courts may permit children under 18 who are witnesses in certain criminal prosecutions like sexual assault, predatory sexual assault of a child, and sexual abuse to testify via closed-circuit television outside the courtroom if the judge determines that in-court testimony would result in the child suffering serious emotional distress.
Rule 213(g): The “Solution” to Rule 220 Creates New Problems By Hon. Barbara A. McDonald February 2001 Article, Page 80 Last month's IBJ focused on the practical implications of Rule 213(g); this month's article undertakes a thorough analysis and offers recommendations for improvement.
Child-witness exception to right to confrontation at trial does not include denial of ability to observe the witness January 2001 Illinois Law Update, Page 14 On November 22, 2000, the Supreme Court of Illinois affirmed the appellate court's finding that a defendant was denied his constitutional right to confrontation during his trial when the trial court allowed the use of podiums to prevent a child witness and the defendant from seeing each other as the witness testified about an alleged sexual attack.
The Dos and Don’ts of Rule 213 Opinion Witness Discovery By Daniel P. Wurl January 2001 Article, Page 22 Guidelines for conducting opinion witness discovery in Illinois.
An Introduction to Opinion Testimony Disclosures in Illinois By Richard L. Miller, II January 2001 Article, Page 18 An overview of Rule 213(f) and (g) and the cases interpreting them.
Retained Experts’ Opinions in Medical Malpractice Cases By Terrence J. Lavin January 2001 Article, Page 39 Rule 213 pointers for med-mal lawyers.
Expert Testimony About Psychological Syndromes: How Far Can an Expert Go? By Steven J. Sturm and Rebecca N. Poulson December 2000 Article, Page 704 How far can psychological experts go in bolstering witness credibility? The authors review the law in Illinois.
Expert Testimony and Valuing Goodwill at Divorce By Michael W. Kalcheim November 2000 Article, Page 652 Find out when and how personal goodwill should be valued at divorce, and how to present and cross-examine experts.
Trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing deposition testimony of plaintiff’s doctor taken 25 months prior to trial regarding plaintiff’s prognosis November 2000 Illinois Law Update, Page 624 On September 21, 2000, the Supreme Court of Illinois affirmed the appellate court's decision that it was not error for the trial court to have admitted deposition testimony regarding the plaintiff's prognosis when the testimony was given 25 months prior to trial.
Supreme court rejects “same part of the body rule” and holds that defendants must present evidence establishing relevance of plaintiff’s prior injury September 2000 Illinois Law Update, Page 500 On July 6, 2000, the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court's ruling that a defendant who wishes to introduce evidence of a prior injury, whether or not the injury is to the same body part, must introduce evidence establishing the prior injury's relevance.
The Lawyer’s Journal By Bonnie C. McGrath August 2000 Column, Page 434 You still have the right to remain silent; UPL and in-house counsel; and more.
The Lawyer’s Journal By Bonnie C. McGrath July 2000 Column, Page 378 Grandparents lose at High Court—but how much? HMOs lose in one high court, win in another; and more.
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle-Injury Litigation By Thomas M. Harris July 2000 Article, Page 409 Don't treat your motorcycle-injury suit like just another automobile case.