On appeal, opponents rarely meet face to face and thus have little opportunity to explore settlement. A new program seeks to make settling easier at the appellate level.
On July 12, 2004, the Illinois Fourth District Appellate Court affirmed that part of the Circuit Court of McLean County's judgment that refused to award attorney's fees incurred by a trustee on appeal.
On May 20, 2003, the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, affirmed the order of the Circuit Court of Cook County convicting the defendant of theft by deception and sentencing him in absentia.
On June 19, 2003, the Illinois Supreme Court held that the plaintiff, by requesting a new trial in her post-trial motion, was foreclosed from later petitioning for appellate review of the first trial pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 306(a)(1) (166 Ill 2d R 306(a)(1)).
On January 24, 2003, the Illinois Supreme Court held that the appellate court had jurisdiction to reverse the trial court's award of attorney fees to the wife for an appeal in her action to dissolve her marriage.
On December 5, 2002, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed the defendant's appeal because the document it filed entitled "Affidavit of Intent to File Petition for Leave to Appeal" was not an "affidavit," but rather a simple pleading.
The supreme court's recent assertion that it lacked jurisdiction because an affidavit of intent to appeal was defective arguably begs the question, "What is jurisdictional?"
On September 9, 2002, the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, affirmed in part and reversed in part the orders of the circuit court of Cook County striking the plaintiff's breach of contract counts, dismissing part of the claim for damages.
Rule 23, which provides for unpublished—and nonprecedential—opinions, has been a source of tension between bench and bar. This article reviews the debate and offers suggestions for change.
