As statutory and case law currently stand, an inadvertent failure to name all of the necessary parties in an administrative review action can be fatal. For a process that is akin to a civil appeal, this seems counterintuitive. But proposed amendments to administrative law championed by the ISBA would allow lawyers to correct their minor procedural missteps and avoid costly damage to their clients.

Carl R. Draper, a partner at Feldman Wasser in Springfield, says that these "hypertechnical processes" are a serious risk for attorneys and their clients. "The process is so convoluted, you can have your case dismissed on a technicality."

Already-passed legislation was supposed to alleviate the problem. It provides that if the agency was properly named, litigants had 35 days to name any other necessary parties, Draper says. However, this has not been enough. The ISBA favors new legislation requiring that all final administrative orders name all of the necessary parties of record, as well as providing the proper name and address of the entity issuing the decision. Find out more in the February IBJ.

Keep informed about what’s available to you as an ISBA member by checking out our new weekly enewsletter – Your Membership: The Featured Five – distributed on Wednesdays.

Each week we’ll highlight 5 quick-takes, helping you make the most of your membership in a way that’s easy to consume. Highlights will include:

• new benefit announcements and current benefit reminders
• practice management and technology resources on our website
• featured seminars in the Free Online CLE catalog
• book releases and flash sales
• leadership and volunteer opportunities
• upcoming events and programs
• practice-related and other vendor discounts
• future program initiatives

Each edition will also feature an ISBA member’s advice, in their own words, on how they put an ISBA resource to work in helping their practice.

Want to be featured in an upcoming edition? Send your picture and quote to Alexa Giacomini, Director of Membership and Marketing.

The John Marshall Law School, Illinois State Bar Association, Illinois Judges Association and, Justinian Society of Lawyers are hosting "The Distinguished Professional Service Joint Dinner" on Thursday, February 25th at the Standard Club in Chicago.

Being honored with the Award of Exemplary Professional Service for their outstanding service to our legal profession and the public in the State of Illinois are Honorable Rita Garman, Illinois Supreme Court Chief Justice; Jesse White, Illinois Secretary of State; and Susan Sher, Senior Advisor to the University of Chicago President and former Assistant to President Obama and Chief of Staff to First Lady Michelle Obama.

The evening will begin with a reception at 5:30 p.m. followed by dinner and program at 6:30 p.m.

Buy tickets, become a sponsor or find out more information at www.isba.org/jointdinner

Asked and Answered

By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

Q. I am the managing member of an 14-attorney firm in Miami. We initiated discussions with a large firm in Boston concerning the possibility of our firm merging with their firm. We met with one of their partners recently at their offices and he presented our interest to his other partners. He has advised us that there is an interest in having us meet the other equity partners and taking discussions to the next level. He would like some initial financial information from us. We feel we must provide them with some financial information at this point, but are unsure what to provide at this stage. I would like to hear your thoughts.

ISBA Director of Legislative Affairs Jim Covington reviews legislation in Springfield of interest to ISBA members. This week he covers Condominium Property Act (House Bill 4489), Condominium Property Act (House Bill 4490) and Forcible Entry and Detainer (House Bill 4491). More information on each bill is available below the video.

The ISBA Standing Committee on Women and the Law will host a Celebrating the Power of Laughter in the Law Luncheon on March 8 at Maggiano’s Little Italy, 516 N. Clark. The Luncheon will feature Special Speaker Dr. Gail Stern, co-owner and chief academic officer of Catharsis Productions.

Stern is an educator and curriculum developer with over 20 years of experience in violence prevention education and advocacy. She is the co-author of the non-stranger rape prevention program, SEX SIGNALS, which is presented over a thousand times at universities and military installations each year. She is also the author of the programs, The Canary in the Mine Shaft; Beat the Blame Game; Why They Fight the Facts; and, Moral Development: Sexual Assault Prevention in a Military Context. Dr. Stern earned her doctorate in Curriculum and Instruction from the University of Wisconsin - Madison, examining the role of humor in reducing the emotional and cognitive resistance to the subject of rape.

For more information, please visit www.isba.org/lol or contact Melissa Burkholder at MBurkholder@isba.org.

The deadline to register is Tuesday, March 3.

Our panel of leading appellate attorneys review Friday's Illinois Supreme Court Civil opinions in Coleman v. East Joliet Fire Protection District and Klaine v. Southern Illinois Hospital Services.

Coleman v. East Joliet Fire Protection District

By Alyssa M. Reiter, Williams, Montgomery & John Ltd.

In this divisive case, the Supreme Court departed from stare decisis and “determined that the time has come to abandon the public duty rule and its special duty exception.”

The public duty rule provided that local governmental entities and their employees owe no duty of care to individual members of the general public to provide governmental services, such as police and fire protection.

The Court based its ruling on three considerations: (1) the jurisprudence regarding the public duty rule was “muddled and inconsistent”; (2) application of the public duty rule is incompatible with the legislature's grant of limited immunity in cases of willful and wanton misconduct; and (3) determining public policy is primarily a legislative function and, by enacting statutory immunities, the legislature had rendered the public duty rule obsolete.

The special concurrence by Justice Freeman, joined by Justice Theis, agreed that the public duty rule must be abolished, but offered alternative justifications for the abolition. Justice Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Garman and Justice Karmeier, dissented, criticizing that the majority and concurring opinions were indefensible and that “both make a mockery of stare decisis.”

Our panel of leading appellate attorneys review Friday's top Illinois Supreme Court Criminal opinions in People v. Cummings, People v. Tolbert, People v. Chambers, People v. Sanders, People. v. Williams, People v. Lerma, People v. Thompson and People v. Salem.

People v. Cummings

By Kerry J. Bryson, Office of the State Appellate Defender

Derrick Cummings was driving a van registered to Pearlene Chattic when an officer initiated a traffic stop because Chattic was the subject of an arrest warrant. The officer could not see the driver before initiating the stop. Upon approaching, he saw Cummings was a man and thus, clearly, was not Chattic. The officer asked Cummings for his license, and defendant responded he did not have one. Cummings was then cited for driving while license suspended.

The circuit court granted suppression, and the appellate court affirmed. Initially, the Illinois Supreme Court followed suit. On remand from the United States Supreme Court to reconsider its earlier opinion in light of Rodriguez v. U.S., 135 S. Ct. 1609, however, the Court reversed.