Practice News

Illinois Court Help was launched today in order to connect people to the resources and information they need to go to court in Illinois. It is the first personalized court information service offered by the Illinois courts and one of the latest innovations created during the COVID-19 pandemic to make the courts and information more accessible.

As Susan Bart demonstrates in her May 2021 Illinois Bar Journal article, “Who Are My Qualified Beneficiaries?,” it is essential to determine the qualified beneficiaries of an irrevocable trust under the Illinois Trust Code (ITC). Qualified beneficiaries have rights to receive notices of the existence of the trust and certain events, information about the trust, and accounts. But qualified beneficiaries may also be necessary parties to certain actions, such as a nonjudicial settlement agreement. A trustee who fails to correctly identify qualified beneficiaries, Bart notes, may breach her or his duties to provide information to qualified beneficiaries, or may provide information to beneficiaries who are not required to receive it. The Uniform Trust Code (UTC), upon which the ITC was based, uses the concept of “qualified beneficiary” to limit the class of beneficiaries to whom certain notices must be given or consents received. Bart introduces several kinds of scenarios that unpack the differences between qualified beneficiaries and remote and contingent beneficiaries under the new ITC.

This May’s Illinois Bar Journal cover story examines the state’s sweeping criminal justice reforms signed into law earlier this year by Gov. Pritzker. The IBJ interviewed defense attorneys, prosecutors, and others who reflected on the legislation. “Some people view it as, ‘They threw every reform into this sausage maker, and this is what came out,’” Stephen Baker, a retired Cook County public defender and member of the Illinois State Bar Association’s Criminal Justice Section Council, told the IBJ. “Some people take the position that, if you wanted a massive change, the time to do it is now. People are just fed up with the conduct of the police. And the train is leaving the station; if you don’t want to get on, get out of the way.” Others spoke optimistically about the reforms: “The breadth of the bill is one of its strong points,” says Jerrod Williams, a judicial clerk and member of the ISBA Steering Committee on Racial Inequality. “Solving the problems of crime and law enforcement requires a multi-front approach. I don’t believe law enforcement alone—that is, prosecuting offenders—is in and of itself a solution to crime. It’s a piece of the solution.”

A lawyer on a Zoom videoconference with other attorneys has to take a phone call during the meeting. But he forgets to press mute as he begins to discuss details of a high-stakes negotiation with the person on the phone. Lots of arm waving from the other Zoom participants ensues, but to no avail. Also, the Zoom host had left the room, leaving no one with the power to mute the attorney. Did the loquacious lawyer breach his duties to his client? What were the duties, if any, of the innocent lawyer-bystanders who were now in possession of very significant information? What about the opposing party in the real estate transaction, were she to be presented with this information? In his April Illinois Bar Journal ethics column, “No, I Am Not a Cat,” Illinois State Bar Association General Counsel Charles Northrup examines this situation—a new twist on the old “errant fax” issue made more unique by now-widely used technology.