Closing argument: avoiding formulas when arguing pain and sufferingBy Dennis Ryan, Jr.September 2001"Pain and suffering" is a mental state that is a compensable element of damage in a personal injury case. Donk Bros. Coal & Coke Co. v. Thil, 228 Ill. 223, 81 N.E. 857 (1907).
Co-editor’s noteBy John L. NisivacoSeptember 2001The first article in this edition is by Scott Gibson of the law firm of Scott B. Gibson, Ltd. in Waukegan. Mr. Gibson's article deals with the applicability of section 3-108 of the Governmental Tort Immunity Act.
Co-editor’s noteBy John L. NisivacoJune 2001The first article in this edition is by The Honorable Edna Turkington-Viktora. Judge Turkington-Viktora discusses the relevancy of a party's failure to possess a valid driver's license in a negligence action.
Co-editor’s noteBy John L. NisivacoMarch 2001The first article in this edition is written by Mark A. Rouleau of The Law Offices of Mark A. Rouleau in Rockford, Illinois. Mark Rouleau also serves as the current chair of the Tort Law Section Council.
Governmental tort immunity— claims for willful and wanton misconduct are reinstated by the legislatureBy Scott B. GibsonSeptember 2001Absolute governmental tort immunity pursuant to the supervision statute continues to be misapplied and confused by practitioners and the judiciary alike due to the closely intertwined and simultaneously conflicting actions by the Illinois Supreme Court and the Illinois State Legislature.
Supreme court holds HMOs may be liable for institutional negligenceBy Daniel P. WurlMarch 2001While 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.
