What if someone were to question whether your blind client knew the contents of her will. Would you be ready for that challenge? And suppose you learn as you begin your interview with a prospective testator that he is deaf. What's your next step?A helpful article by Gerry W. Beyer in the latest ISBA Trusts & Estates newsletter explores these and related questions. It also advises how to meet the needs of illiterate and physically disabled clients.

The 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago has issued an order asking the district court to issue a preliminary injunction enjoining the Cook County State's Attorney from applying the Illinois eavesdropping statute against the ACLU and its employees or agents for openly recording law enforcement officers who are performing their official duties in public places. The court held that Illinois' eavesdropping law "likely violates" the First Amendment. The opinion is available here. The Illinois State Bar Association is opposed to the law and supports SB 1808 - which would allow a citizen to audio and video record police officers performing public duties in public places. More information on SB 1808 is below.The Facts on Illinois’ Eavesdropping Law: Support SB 1808 as amended by HA #1Q:  What is this bill trying to address?A:  Illinois eavesdropping law allows a citizen to video-record (film) a law enforcement officer doing public duty in a public place but makes it a Class 1 felony if the citizen audio-records the same public activity. Senate Bill 1808 strikes the right balance between the reasonable expectation of privacy and the First Amendment by allowing citizens to audio record law enforcement officers performing public duties in public places.Q:  What do Illinois’ courts have to say about the current eavesdropping law?

The Springfield State Journal-Register is reporting that opposition from the Illinois State Bar Association has stalled progress of HJRCA 29. The victims' rights amendment appeared headed for a place on the November ballot after clearing the Illinois Senate 55-1. Opposition from ISBA, Illinois state’s attorneys and Illinois public defenders associations gave legislators cause for concern.A good state’s attorney will keep crime victims abreast of developments during trial, said Jim Covington, the bar association’s director of legislative affairs. But the amendment would have given victims and their lawyers more input in the courtroom.Under the amendment, victims would have:* The right to be heard at any post-arraignment court proceeding;* Access to relevant documents relating to the defendant;* Be considered if and when bail for the offender is being contemplated; and* Have the ability to back up those rights in courts that have jurisdiction on the case.Covington said it would be impractical to allow victims the right to be heard at any post-arraignment court proceeding.“It would undermine the presumption of innocence if you add a third — someone besides the state and the defendant, a victim or his or her lawyer — involved in the case from that point forward,” Covington said.Click here to read the full articleRead Rep. Jim Sacia's (R-Freeport) explanation of why he voted against HJRCA 29

The Women and the Law Committee, along with the Racial and Ethnic Minority Committee and other sponsors,hosted a program and reception on April 26, 2012 at the 5th Appellate District in Mt. Vernon. The program highlighted women in the Illinois Judiciary and featured a keynote address by Michele M. Jochner on the history of women lawyers and judges in Illinois, as well as the Illinois Supreme Court Historic Preservation Commission’s exhibit titled “Early Illinois Women Lawyers.”