In their November Illinois Bar Journal article, “A Palpable Conflict,” Anthony J. Longo and John M. Fitzgerald pit two ancient doctrines against each other: the law of the case vs. subject-matter jurisdiction. What happens, Longo and Fitzgerald ask, when subject-matter jurisdiction and the law-of-the-case doctrine clash? In other words, does the law-of-the-case doctrine really bar someone from relitigating the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction in a subsequent appeal? The authors, in their article, “A Palpable Conflict,” show that there is a split of authority on this issue. While the majority of reported Illinois decisions on this issue have held that the law-of-the-case doctrine indeed bars relitigating a court’s subject-matter jurisdiction, a minority of cases have found (or at least strongly suggest) that defects in subject-matter jurisdiction can indeed be raised at any time—including after the appellate court has already ruled that it does possess subject-matter jurisdiction.
Practice News
-
November 9, 2020 | Practice News
-
November 5, 2020 | Practice News
The Illinois Supreme Court has amended Rules 280.1 and 280.2, which now include a definition of the word “payment” for credit card or debt buyer collection actions.
The Court also updated the corresponding sample form. The changes go into effect immediately.
-
November 2, 2020 | Practice News
In its lead November feature article, the Illinois Bar Journal profiles several attorneys who decided to ditch the office years ago or were forced to because of the COVID-19 pandemic. While some attorneys say working at home is a mixed bag, others have embraced their new home offices and vow never to commute again. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced millions of U.S. workers to perform their jobs at home. (At one point during the pandemic, more than 60 percent of the U.S. labor market was working remotely; by midsummer, the percentage had dipped to about 42 percent, which is still significantly higher than pre-COVID-19 levels). While working at home isn’t new, including for attorneys, the pandemic has nudged many more toward the work-at-home lifestyle.
-
October 28, 2020 | Practice News
The Illinois Supreme Court handed down one opinion on Wednesday, October 28. In People v. Casler, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded a defendant’s conviction for obstructing justice when he provided a false name to police.
-
October 28, 2020 | Practice News
The Illinois Supreme Court announced this week the expansion of the Volunteer Pro Bono Program for Criminal Appeals (Program) to include the Third, Fourth, and Fifth Appellate Districts beginning on December 1, 2020.
-
October 27, 2020 | Practice News
The Illinois Supreme Court announced today two orders which were proposals from the Illinois Judicial Conference’s Court Operations During COVID-19 Task Force (Task Force).
The Orders are available on the Court website by clicking here.
-
October 26, 2020 | Practice News
This year, legalized recreational cannabis was supposed to dominate the news in Illinois and elsewhere (other things happened). In their October Illinois Bar Journal article, “What’s That Smell?,” Emily L. Fitch and Brenda M. (Duke) Mathis revisit Illinois’ new cannabis-related laws and follow the legal issues sprouting from cannabis legalization. They conclude multiple issues remain to be clarified by legislative action and caselaw, including questions surrounding probable cause with the scent of cannabis alone and whether a free air sniff is sufficient when the dog has been trained to detect cannabis. Up to this point, Illinois courts have placed only limited restrictions on free air sniffs. However, it does appear that the reviewing courts are prepared to throw out a prosecutorial-minded approach to the free air sniff and write new caselaw in the face of cannabis legalization. Fitch and Mathis also summarize new cannabis laws and compare Illinois with other states revisiting probable-search caselaw in light of cannabis legalization.
-
October 23, 2020 | Practice News
Chief Justice Anne M. Burke and the Illinois Supreme Court announced today the amendment of Rule 415, which will allow attorneys to provide a copy of discovery to a defendant unless good cause is shown why the discovery should not be furnished to the defendant.
1 comment (Most recent October 26, 2020) -
October 22, 2020 |
Practice News
By Michael Bergmann, Executive Director of the Public Interest Law Initiative
Coordinated by the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on Pro Bono and Public Service, Pro Bono Week is intended to inspire even greater pro bono participation by lawyers throughout the nation. In 2020, Pro Bono Week will be celebrated from October 25-31. This initiative provides an opportunity for legal organizations across the country to collaboratively commemorate the vitally important contributions of America’s lawyers and to recruit and train the many additional volunteers required to meet the growing demand. The Standing Committee on Pro Bono and Public Service undertook this initiative to provide a format for showcasing the incredible difference that pro bono lawyers make to our nation, to our system of justice, to our communities and, most of all, to the clients they serve. For more information, visit www.celebrateprobono.org.
-
October 22, 2020 | Practice News
The Illinois Supreme Court handed down three opinions on Thursday, October 22. In People v. Lusby, the court denied a defendant’s request for leave to file a successive post-conviction petition asserting that his sentencing hearing was constitutionally inadequate. In Tabirta v. Cummings, the court considered whether the existence of one part-time employee who services a few of a defendant corporation’s customers from his home in Cook County satisfies the “other office” or “doing business” prongs of section 2-102(a) of the venue statute. In Goral v. Dart, a split court allowed disciplined and fired Cook County correctional officers to continue their lawsuits against Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart.