Section Newsletters

Articles From Daniel P. Wurl

The continuing evolution of IPI No. 105.01 By Daniel P. Wurl Tort Law, November 2013 This article will address the Supreme Court’s decision in Studt v. Sherman Health Systems, d/b/a Sherman Hospital and the 2011 version of IPI 105.01 that the Committee issued on the heels of the Studt decision.
IPI No. 105.01: Did the Supreme Court Committee fix it or break what wasn’t broken? By Daniel P. Wurl Tort Law, January 2010 A look at the reasons for the revisions made to the IPI 105.01 by the Supreme Court Committee, the appellate court decisions on which the Committee relied for the revisions, and the four appellate court cases that have addressed IPI 105.01 since the 2006 revisions were made.
General principles of trial witness disclosure under Supreme Court Rule 213 By Daniel P. Wurl Tort Law, January 2008 This article will focus on general principles of Rule 213 trial witness disclosure, testimony at trial, and appellate review as set forth in appellate court cases that have been decided in the last five years since the Supreme Court made major modifications to Rule 213 in 2002.
Making sense of new Supreme Court Rule 213 By Daniel P. Wurl Young Lawyers Division, December 2002 The Illinois Supreme Court recently announced significant amendments to Rule 213 relating to the disclosure of trial witness testimony. These amendments took effect on July 1, 2002.
The Illinois Supreme Court makes major revisions to trial witness disclosures under Rule 213 By Daniel P. Wurl Civil Practice and Procedure, August 2002 The Illinois Supreme Court recently announced significant amendments to Rule 213 relating to the disclosure of trial witness testimony. These amendments took effect on July 1, 2002.
The continuous course of negligent treatment doctrine By Daniel P. Wurl Tort Law, June 2002 A plaintiff filing a medical malpractice action must file it within the time limits set forth in Chapter 735, section 5/13-212(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure, in order for the action to be timely. 735 ILCS 5/13-212(a).
Rule 213 opinion witness case update By Daniel P. Wurl Civil Practice and Procedure, November 2001 This article provides an update on recent decisions in opinion witness disclosure and testimony under Supreme Court Rule 213.
Institutional negligence claims against hospitals and other health care entities By Daniel P. Wurl Tort Law, June 2001 This article is intended to supplement the prior article entitled "Supreme Court Holds HMOs May Be Liable for Institutional Negligence."
Supreme court holds HMOs may be liable for institutional negligence By Daniel P. Wurl Tort Law, March 2001 While it is common knowledge that a health care institution can be vicariously liable for the negligent acts or omissions of its employees and agents under the doctrine of respondeat superior, litigators sometimes overlook a claim against the health care institution itself for its own independent negligent acts or omissions.
HMO liability and the fiduciary duty of physicians By Daniel P. Wurl Tort Law, May 2000 There has been a flurry of recent decisions by the appellate courts involving important issues relating to health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and the physicians who treat patients in HMOs in which the physicians have an ownership interest.
Rule 213 opinion witness case update By Daniel P. Wurl Civil Practice and Procedure, May 2000 The Illinois Supreme court recently passed on its first opportunity to provide some guidance as to the scope of Rule 213(g), which mandates the disclosure of the identity of opinion witnesses and their opinion testimony.
Obtaining leave of court to pursue punitive damage claim By Daniel P. Wurl Tort Law, December 1999 A plaintiff who wishes to plead a claim for punitive damages in actions under Illinois law involving bodily injury or property damages based on negligence or product liability must first obtain leave of court.
A Summary of Rule 213 opinion witness cases By Daniel P. Wurl Civil Practice and Procedure, October 1999 Editors' Note: In the last issue of Trial Briefs, we published a summary of recent decisions dealing with the operation of Rule 213, together with an appendix that provided a more detailed account of the decisions.
A Summary of Rule 213 opinion witness cases By Daniel P. Wurl Civil Practice and Procedure, September 1999 On June 1, 1995, the Illinois Supreme Court entered an order making major revisions to some of its discovery rules
Punitive damages and the corporate complicity rule By Daniel P. Wurl Tort Law, May 1999 It has long been established in Illinois that punitive damages may be awarded when torts are committed with fraud, actual malice, deliberate violence or oppression, or when a defendant has acted willfully or with such gross negligence as to indicate a wanton disregard for the rights of others.

Spot an error in your article? Contact Sara Anderson at sanderson@isba.org. For information on obtaining a copy of an article,visit the ISBA Newsletters page.

Select a Different Author