Publications

Section Newsletter Articles From Edward Casmere

ABA considers modifying model rules on attorney advertising By Edward Casmere Bench and Bar, January 2018 The rules controlling how lawyers communicate with the public may be in for an overhaul.
Shakespeare’s cold wisdom—Too early seen unknown, and known too late? By Edward Casmere Bench and Bar, September 2017 The point of this article is not to advocate for a campaign of carpet-bombing legal briefs and arguments with quotes from Shakespeare, but rather to suggest that this giant of the literary world has gifted lawyers with timeless insights that may help us better “suit the action to the word, the word to the action” as we practice our craft.
Rule 502: Something Illinois litigants can learn from federal courts By Eli Litoff, Kelly Warner, and Edward Casmere Bench and Bar, May 2017 Rule 502 sets forth several significant provisions – including 502(d) – which can be implemented by the courts and parties to proactively address production and protection of privileged material.
Proportionality in e-discovery: The Illinois appellate court seeks to find the right fit By Eli Litoff, Kelly Warner, and Edward Casmere Bench and Bar, April 2017 In the years since Supreme Court Rule 201 was amended in 2014, Illinois appellate courts have not had occasion to apply the proportionality test, leaving litigants to resort to federal precedent to define their proportionality arguments.
People v. Jones: Prejudicial remarks in a criminal trial By Edward Casmere and Eliberty Lopez Bench and Bar, December 2016 In People v. Jones, the First District reversed the convictions and ordered a new trial in front of a new judge based on prejudicial comments made by the State and the trial court.
The Second District avoids causing new ripples in the common law “test the waters” doctrine By Edward Casmere and Kaitlin Klamann Bench and Bar, September 2016 While the Illinois appellate courts continue to disagree as to whether the “test the waters” doctrine may serve as a basis for denying a motion for substitution of judge, both the Supreme Court and the Second District have signaled that, when considering a Section 2-1001 motion, trial court judges should consider whether the circumstances indicate that a party is seeking to gain a tactical advantage through gamesmanship and judge-shopping.
Supreme Court supports circuit court’s discretion to deny a motion to substitute judge in refiled case By Edward Casmere Bench and Bar, January 2016 In Bowman v. Ottney, the Illinois Supreme Court held that trial courts have discretion to deny a motion for substitution of judge in a refiled case when the motion is presented to the same judge who made substantive rulings in the previously dismissed case.
Why do pro bono work? By James A. Clark and Edward Casmere Bench and Bar, September 2015 A look at some of the reasons to provide pro bono work.

Spot an error in your article? Contact Sara Anderson at sanderson@isba.org. For information on obtaining a copy of an article,visit the ISBA Newsletters page.

Select a Different Author