New Trial, New Judge?By Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, October 2025A case summary of People v. Class, 2025 IL 129695, and the Illinois Supreme Court's ruling regarding an appellate court's sua sponte order in a postconviction proceeding to remand the matter to a new trial judge.
Substantive Elements in Special State Pleading LawsBy Jeffrey A. ParnessFederal Civil Practice, July 2025In Berk, the issue is whether a Delaware affidavit of merit (AOM) statute governing “healthcare negligence” claims, 18 Delaware Code 6853 (a)(1-3), applied in a diversity case involving the treatment of a Florida citizen in Delaware that was prompted by a fall in a Delaware home. Upon examining the principles of Erie R.R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938) and its progeny, the Third Circuit determined that there was no conflict involving federal civil procedure rules
Inherent Federal Court Sanctioning AuthorityBy Jeffrey A. ParnessIntellectual Property, March 2025In Keyes Law Firm, LLC v. Napoli, (4th Cir. 2024), the court provided primers on the inherent sanctioning authority of federal courts for civil litigation misconduct and on the guidelines for determining related attorney fee awards. In doing so, it recognized that some problematic state court conduct could prompt federal court sanctions and that the fee award norms for such conduct should differ from those employed in many fee-shifting statutes.
Inherent Federal Court Sanctioning AuthorityBy Jeffrey A. ParnessFederal Civil Practice, January 2025In Keyes Law Firm, LLC v. Napoli, (4th Cir. 2024), the court provided primers on the inherent sanctioning authority of federal courts for civil litigation misconduct and on the guidelines for determining related attorney fee awards. In doing so, it recognized that some problematic state court conduct could prompt federal court sanctions and that the fee award norms for such conduct should differ from those employed in many fee-shifting statutes.
Pre-suit Information Preservation Duties in Multistate CasesBy Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, December 2024Hard issues may still confront lawyers even when the future forum is known. The Illinois court may need to decide to apply non-Illinois law, including the law of another state or of the United States. Further, the choice of which government’s preservation duty law may vary depending on the form of the preservation duty.
Choosing Parentage LawsBy Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, May 2024Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services ex rel. Hull v. Robinson highlights the challenges facing lawyers and judges when parentage issues arise in two or more states.
Binding Nonsignatories to Forum Selection ClausesBy Prof. Jeffrey A. ParnessFederal Civil Practice, December 2022The Franlink Inc. v. BACE Services court joined all other federal appellate courts in employing the “closely related” doctrine to determine whether a nonsignatory to a contract with a forum selection clause was bound by the clause.
FRCP 11 Sanctions for Advocating Bad Discovery Papers?By Jeffrey A. ParnessFederal Civil Practice, September 2022How Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure might apply to advocating from what are now, but were not always, bad discovery papers.
Presuit Lawyer Information Preservation DutiesBy Professor Jeffrey A. ParnessFederal Civil Practice, December 2021Judicial sanctions for lawyer failures in preserving information relevant to anticipated/current federal civil actions have changed significantly in the last 15 years.
Federal Presuit Information Preservation OrdersBy Jeffrey A. ParnessFederal Civil Practice, December 2020Federal civil procedure laws allowing presuit information preservation orders by courts should be expanded in order to promote greater compliance with current substantive and procedural laws on the duties of preserving civil litigation information.
Contextual parentageBy Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, December 2018A parentage determination can be used in a dispute over child custody/visitation/parental responsibility allocation opportunities, over child support duties, over heirship in probate, or over standing to pursue tort remedies.
Hush up about sexual misconductBy Jeffrey A. ParnessDiversity Leadership Council, June 2018As alleged victims of sexual misconduct will be increasingly likely to seek redress, the time is ripe to explore how Illinois laws do and should regulate sexual misconduct settlements.
Sexual misconduct and Illinois civil procedure lawsBy Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, February 2018Surely, there is a need for immediate and serious discussions of law reform measures designed to remedy those already harmed by sexual misconduct as well as to prevent future instances of such misconduct. But some discussions should also involve possible Illinois civil procedure law reforms.
Uncertainties when only principals are sued for the acts of agentsBy Jeffrey A. Parness & Alex YorkoCivil Practice and Procedure, January 2017The court in Yarbrough said that generally a claimant need not join an agent when suing a principal. Yet lawyers in civil cases alleging vicarious liability of a principal must proceed with caution regarding nonjoinder of the agent as sometimes there will operate a res judicata defense.
Lost Electronically Stored Information (ESI)By Jeffrey A. ParnessFederal Civil Practice, September 2016A review of the basic features of the new FRCP 37(e), its counterparts in Illinois, and its impact on all Illinois lawyers, wherever they practice.
Lost Electronically Stored Information (ESI)By Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, July 2016A review of the basic features of the new FRCP 37(e), its counterparts in Illinois, and its impact on all Illinois lawyers, wherever they practice.
Statutory silence on burden of proofBy Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, June 2015It seems reasonable to infer that the General Assembly desires the same clear and convincing evidence norm in removal petition cases as it has expressly articulated for custody order modification cases. Individual statutes should be interpreted, at times, by references to other statutes.
Lawyer investigations into uncertain parentageBy Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, March 2015With the growing phenomenon of uncertain parentage, lawyers also cannot assume that an established legal parentage in one setting will apply in all other settings.
General partner liability on a judgment against the partnershipBy Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, November 2014When the negligence of a partnership employee caused one harm, can one sue a partner on a theory of respondent superior in a 2007 case and then, after losing that claim, sue the same partner in 2013 for the unsatisfied portion of the judgment entered against the general partnership in the earlier case?
Evolving Illinois parentage lawsBy Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, April 2014A look at what the trends, driven by changes in technology and human conduct toward legal parentage beyond biological ties and formal adoptions, mean for civil litigators.
Limits on common law privileges and self-critical analysesBy Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, February 2014The recent case of Harris v. One Hope United, Inc. did not elaborate on any differences between General Assembly deference in privilege extension or establishment.
New guidelines on privileged marital communicationsBy Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, December 2013In the recent case of People v. Trzeciak, Justice Theis was "troubled" by the majority's definition of confidentiality, which she found to constitute “a new exception” not found in statute. What was the new exception and will it apply in civil as well as criminal cases?
Non-residents’ streams of conduct and personal jurisdictionBy Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, July 2013The most difficult issue in specific jurisdiction cases often involves the requirement of purposeful availment by the nonresident of the benefits to be had in the foreign forum. The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Fiore v. Walden, affording it yet another chance to elaborate on this requirement.
Evolving standards on standing in child careBy Jeffrey A. ParnessHuman and Civil Rights, March 2013This spring, the Illinois General Assembly may consider significant amendments to both the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act and the Illinois Parentage Act.
Evolving standards on standing to child careBy Jeffrey A. ParnessFamily Law, March 2013This spring, the Illinois General Assembly may consider significant amendments to both the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act and the Illinois Parentage Act.
New Illinois Evidence Rule 502By Jeffrey A. ParnessAdministrative Law, March 2013Effective January 1, 2013, new Illinois Evidence Rule 502 establishes standards on losses of attorney-client privilege and work-product protection via disclosure.
New Illinois Evidence Rule 502By Jeffrey A. ParnessBench and Bar, March 2013Effective January 1, 2013, new Illinois Evidence Rule 502 establishes standards on losses of attorney-client privilege and work-product protection via disclosure.
New Illinois Evidence Rule 502By Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, January 2013Effective January 1, 2013, new Illinois Evidence Rule 502 establishes standards on losses of attorney-client privilege and work-product protection via disclosure.
Standing to childrear: 2013By Jeffrey A. ParnessCivil Practice and Procedure, October 2012For now, standing to childrear in Illinois will be generally limited to biological and adoptive parents. But that may change soon with increasing calls for statutory reforms and precedents recognizing that children’s best interests, as well as societal and quasi-parental interests, should not automatically yield to superior parental rights seemingly waived without any judicial oversight.
Spot an error in your article? Contact Celeste Niemann at cniemann@isba.org. For information on obtaining a copy of an article, visit the ISBA Newsletters page.
