Browse articles by year: 2016 (4)
Newsletter articles from 2008
10-Year limitations period applies to indemnity suit
In Travelers Casualty & Surety Co. v. Bowman, Docket No. 103759, 2008 WL 2837323 (July 24, 2008), the Supreme Court held that the 10-year statute of limitations applied to a suit on a written indemnity agreement arising from defaults under construction contract performance bonds.
Another court applies the collateral source rule
The April 2007 decision in Wills v. Foster held that when Medicare and Medicaid discount the recoverable medical bills, the plaintiff will receive a comparably reduced recovery. Another district of the appellate court has now weighed in on the same question with a contrary ruling.
Due process requires live testimony to judge witness credibility
The Second District of the Illinois Appellate Court in Anderson v. Kohler, 376 Ill.App.3d 714, 877 N.E.2d 110, 315 Ill.Dec. 623 (2nd Dist. Oct. 4, 2007), recently reversed the lower court’s decision for relying on a transcript of plaintiffs’ case-in-chief from a prior trial rather than allowing the plaintiffs to present their case-in-chief anew.
ERISA and the Common Fund Doctrine: A precept
If you have dealt with a so-called ERISA lien before, you are trained to spot these liens from a mile away and already know the consequences. However, if this is your first heavyweight bout with the albatross which is referred to as the ERISA lien, you simply have no idea what you are about to encounter.
Minimal property damage as evidence of non-injury
Despite the youth of the century, the Twenty-First has already spawned six cases from four Appellate Court districts dealing with defense efforts to establish lack of plaintiff’s injury by showing minimal vehicle contact.
Motions attacking motions: A plea to end the violence
The author suggests that next time we are vexed by another party’s motion, we should remember IRMO Sutherland and Wolff and resist the urge to move to strike or dismiss. Such a motion is a nullity and unnecessarily clogs the motion calendars of the circuit court.
Supreme Court Rule 236 and the admissibility of medical records at trial
Illinois Supreme Court Rule 236 can be a useful tool for the admission of medical and hospital records into evidence at trial, eliminating the need for a party to spend hundreds or perhaps thousands of dollars to have a medical doctor, nurse or other health care professional testify in court or by evidence deposition to have the records admitted.
“Tactical gamesmanship” and trial practice: Can it be good advocacy?
Playing by the rules applies to each party regardless of whether they are on opposite sides of the aisle. If it becomes otherwise, the keystone of those rules will be undermined, thereby making the trial process an also-ran and other than what all litigants, or their counsel, expect.
Trial court erred in allowing defendant to withdraw rejection of arbitration award
The Second District Appellate Court recently reversed a lower court’s decision in Stemple v. Pickerill, which allowed the defendant to withdraw his rejection of an arbitration award made pursuant to the court annexed mandatory arbitration program, while denying the plaintiffs from filing their own rejection of such an award.
A trial lawyer’s reminiscences
Editor’s note: Last year, Jack E. Horsley sent a letter to me as co-editor of Trial Briefs stating that has been a long-time reader of our newsletter and expressing his appreciation for the fine caliber of articles we published. In an exchange of letters, Mr. Horsley sent a touching novella (“All About Biff”) about his beloved and faithful pet dog who saved a very young Jack from a vicious stray.
Unlike substantive character evidence in a civil or criminal case, the character trait for veracity discussed in this article only concerns either impeachment or rehabilitation.