The Illinois Coalition Against the Death Penalty is having a lobby day in Springfield on Thursday, March 11. They are inviting supporters to register and participate at the State House to lobby individual legislators. More information may be found here. House Bill 5687 (Yarbrough, D-Maywood) and Senate Bill 3569 (Delgado, D-Chicago) have been filed to do this.
Practice News
-
March 1, 2010 |
Practice News
-
February 26, 2010 |
Practice News
The Illinois Supreme Court has amended its rules to provide a swifter means for achieving permanency and stability in child custody issues relating to divorce and parentage cases. The rules changes allow the appeal of custody issues even if other matters in those cases are unresolved. The situation often arises in marriage dissolution cases that can linger over issues of property, spousal support and other matters; or in parentage cases where decisions affecting the rights and persons other than the child may be unresolved. A primary change amends Supreme Court Rule 304 to allow a trial court’s permanent determination of custody to be appealed even if other issues in the underlying matter remain unresolved.
-
February 26, 2010 |
Practice News
Okay, this is pretty good: Why your lawyer won't take or return your phone calls -- top 10 reasons. (Hat tip -- Jeremy Reppy.)
-
February 24, 2010 |
Practice News
The Illinois Supreme Court amended Rules 11, 12, 361, 267, 373, 381 and 383 to reflect the popularity and efficiency of third-party commercial carriers, Judge Barbara Crowder writes in the latest ISBA Trial Briefs newsletter. Attorneys will no longer run afoul of the rules by using a commercial carrier instead of the USPS when filing documents with courts or applying the mailbox rule to deadlines. Read the article here. And join the Civil Practice section to get every issue of Trial Briefs delivered to your e-mail inbox or -- in fine USPS fashion -- your mailbox.
-
February 24, 2010 |
Practice News
Asked and Answered By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC Q. I am an attorney that has been in practice for 10 years with a large firm (200+) in the Midwest. I represented fortune 500 clients in the area of business and commercial transactions. I was a non-equity partner in the firm. Recently I was let go due to the economy and I have no idea when or whether I will ever be called back to work. For three months I have been applying for positions with no success. I am considering starting my own solo practice. Where and how should I start? A. Being an attorney in solo practice will be a much different experience than what you are used to. You will have to handle more of the nuts and bolts of running and operating a practice. You will not have people to do everything for you like in your last firm. You will need to learn how to be an entrepreneur and think like a businessman. First, I suggest that you give some thought as to whether you have what it takes to operate your own firm and plan out your business. The best way to go about this is with a business plan. Click here for an article on the subject. After your have developed your plan, begin developing your business identity, firm name, tag line, website domain name and related graphic package.
-
February 23, 2010 |
Practice News
As most ISBA members know, the estate tax disappeared (poof!) at the stroke of midnight on January 1, 2010. If you're rich, it's a great time to die. But just because there's no tax at the moment doesn't mean clients can get by without a lawyer's learned counsel. As Jodie E. Distler Hanzlik explains in the latest ISBA Trusts and Estates newsletter, there's more to estate planning than tax avoidance. Such as? Such as planning for incapacity. And probate avoidance. And deciding what happens to the kids. And lots more, as Jodie expertly describes. Read her article here. Make sure you get more articles like it by joining the Trusts and Estates section here.
-
February 23, 2010 |
Practice News
Chief Circuit Judge Stephen J. Culliton is pleased to announce that two finalists for the Office of Associate Judge have been selected and certified by the Illinois Supreme Court. The finalists are seeking to fill the vacancy created by the elevation of Associate Judge Daniel P. Guerin to Circuit Judge. The Circuit Judges will select the appointee by secret ballot. Scott M. Hardek received his J.D. from the Law School at the University of Notre Dame in 1990. He is currently a partner with the law firm of Dykema Gossett in Lisle. Michael A. Wolfe received his J.D. from the John Marshall Law School in 1984. He is currently the Chief of the Criminal Division of the DuPage County State's Attorney's Office.
-
February 23, 2010 |
Practice News
Fastcase Tips: Make Your Own Annotations on Fastcase Annotated statute products are great for statute research – especially for providing lists of cases that cite a particular code section. But did you know that you can make your own annotations on Fastcase? To SEARCH for cases that cite a particular statute:
- Enter the statute citation in quotes in the Advanced Case Law Search box. Or, enter the statute citation with keywords that discuss your issue: “720 ILCS 125/2” or “720 ILCS 125/2” AND specific intent
- Choose Boolean Phrase as your Search Type.
- Select the appropriate jurisdictions for your statute under Select Jurisdiction.
- Click Search.
-
February 22, 2010 |
Practice News
Wheaton lawyer Don Ramsell posted the following comments to ISBA 's criminal law discussion group about the Illinois Supreme Court's ruling last Friday in People v. McKown (the Peoria Journal Star's account is here). "Good News [for DUI defense lawyers]: The Illinois Supreme Court ruled in favor of my client...and reversed her conviction, finding that the [horizontal gaze nystagmus] test that was not proven to be properly performed and therefore was wrongfully admitted into evidence! "The case also deals with the admissibility of HGN as proof of actual impairment under Frye v. United States. The court held that it does not prove actual impairment, and that it can be used only for the possibility of impairment; just like consumption of alcohol. "There are many good points for the defense in this case. For the first time in Illinois, the court limited the HGN as follows: 1. The HGN cannot be portrayed as proof of actual impairment; 2. The HGN cannot be used to establish an alcohol concentration, or to suggest greater than 0.08 3. The HGN now requires strict compliance with NHTSA (no more cop saying "I don't know what NHTSA is, but I did it according to my training"....) 4. The court also stated that on a case-by-case basis, the trial court can rule that the admission of HGN is inadmissible on grounds of undue prejudice. 5.
-
February 19, 2010 |
Practice News
The Illinois Supreme Court today ruled that imprisoned ex-Gov. George Ryan should not receive any of his state pension because of his conviction on corruption charges. Here's the Court's summary opinion: No. 108184 Ryan v. Board of Trustees Appellate citation: 388 Ill. App. 3d 161. JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Chief Justice Fitzgerald and Justices Freeman, Kilbride, Garman, and Karmeier concurred in the judgment and opinion. Justice Burke dissented, with opinion. In 2006, former Governor George H. Ryan was convicted of multiple federal felonies committed, between 1990 and 2002, as Secretary of State and as Governor. After his convictions, the Illinois State Retirement System notified him that his pension benefits from the General Assembly Retirement System were being statutorily suspended. Ryan had been a member of this system since 1972, when he joined the General Assembly, and continued in it through his holding of the offices of Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State and Governor. However, his service in the General Assembly and as Lieutenant Governor did not give rise to any felony convictions and, Ryan asserted, he was entitled to benefits based on those earlier years of service. The administrative termination of benefits was upheld by the circuit court of Cook County, but the appellate court reversed in February 2009. In this decision, the Illinois Supreme Court held that Ryan had forfeited all of the benefits he earned from the General Assembly Retirement System, regardless of the fact that he had not been convicted of any felonies in connection with his years in the General Assembly or as Lieutenant Governor.