The newsletter of the ISBA’s Section on Civil Practice & Procedure
Browse articles by year: 2015 (2)
Newsletter articles from 2006
Attorney’s retaining lien, circa 1889
Contrary to the popular misconception of many attorneys and judges, including this writer, Illinois has, since 1889, recognized and enforced the right of an attorney to retain his physical file until the client has paid for his services.
Beware of putting attorney-client communications at issue or face waiver of privilege
In Lama v. Preskill, 353 Ill. App. 3d 300, 818 N.E.2d 443 (2nd Dist. 2004), the Second District Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment that certain contested documents were not protected by the attorney-client privilege, but reversed the trial court’s contempt order entered against plaintiff and her attorney for refusal to tender the contested documents to opposing counsel.
Building a legal system in 21st century Russia
While scholars can debate the reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union, it is clear that as Russia enters the 21st century, the legal system will require a modification unknown in previous centuries.
Fairness and equity permeate the ab initio arena
The Illinois Supreme Court’s recent decision in Perlstein v. Wolk, 218 Ill. 2d 448, 844 N.E.2d 923 (2006), struck a powerful balance between considerations of fairness and equity with the often harsh results of the void ab initio doctrine.
How to handle an employer’s group health plan lien
As a result of an accident, the plaintiff was injured. He brings a suit in circuit court for negligence. His damages include medical bills that were paid for by his employer’s group health insurance plan. After pursuing discovery, including depositions, the case settles. The health plan asserts a lien for the amount it paid. How should the lawyer handle the employer’s group health plan lien?
Offers of proof: What are they and when do you need them?
The trial court has entered an order which declares the dissolution of marriage complaint that was filed three months previous is: (1) set for trial in 60 days; and that if either party wanted to call more than two witnesses it had to request a pretrial conference seven (7) days before trial.
Promissory estoppel: Shield or sword?
According to the court’s majority in the Fifth District’s decision of DeWitt v. Fleming, 357 Ill.App.3d 571, 828 N.E.2d 756 (5th Dist. 2005), promissory estoppel may be used as a defense but not as a cause of action.
Requests to Admit: Vision Point of Sale v. Haas
On November 29, 2006 the Illinois Supreme Court granted a petition for leave to appeal in the case of Vision Point of Sale, Inc. v. Haas, 366 Ill.App.3d 692, 852 N.E.2d 331 (1st Dist. 2006).