Every personal injury lawyer has handled a motor-vehicle case. When photographs exist showing damage (or the lack thereof) to the vehicles involved in a collision, the parties will invariably try to admit the photos into evidence to support their theory of the case. If the photos show substantial damage, the plaintiff will seek to admit them to argue that the impact between the vehicles was significant, and that the force of the impact caused more serious injuries. Conversely, if the photos show little or no damage, the defendant will seek to admit the photos to suggest that the impact was minimal, and that the plaintiff was therefore not likely injured to the extent claimed. But what does all this mean now, in light of Peach v. McGovern, in which the Illinois Supreme Court recently held that in personal injury cases, expert testimony is not required to admit postaccident photographs of vehicles involved in a collision? In his February 2020 Illinois Bar Journal article, “A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words,” Arlo Walsman examines this development in caselaw.