ISBA Members, please login to join this section

2001 Articles

Calling all government attorneys March 2001 The ISBA's Standing Committee on Government Lawyers wants to include you in its constituency.
Discovery disclosure: State Rules 222 and 218 By William J. Borah April 2001 A look at the automatic discovery disclosures required by Rule 26 and related rules.
Do parties have an absolute right to directly question prospective jurors during voir dire? By Scott D. Lane September 2001 Two cases have recently addressed the issue of whether parties have a right to directly question jurors during voir dire: People v. Allen, 313 Ill.App.3d 842, 730 N.E.2d 1216 (2nd Dist. 2000) and Grossman v. Gebarowski, 315 Ill.App.3d 213, 732 N.E.2d 1100 (1st Dist. 2000).
Editor’s note September 2001 The editors apologize for having failed to identify the authors of the following articles in the June 2001 edition of Trial Briefs:
Establishing a protectable interest: forward thinking for clients that use restrictive covenants By David M. Rownd September 2001 One of the worst nightmares for any business is to discover that a trusted employee has decided to leave and begin competing against it armed with its proprietary information and established relationships with its customers.
Expert? I don’t need no stinking expert! Lay opinion testimony June 2001 The prohibition against opinion testimony by lay witnesses on ultimate issues has been relaxed.
Illinois physicians and the enforceability of covenants not to compete in the wake of Carter-Shields By Michael K. Goldberg September 2001 Recently, the Fifth District Appellate Court reversed an Order of the Circuit Court of Madison County granting partial summary judgment to defendants, a medical corporation and its assignee, in an action involving the enforceability of a contractual covenant not to compete against a board-certified family-practice physician.
The importance of prompt settlement notice in the prosecution of underinsured motorist claims By Dennis H. Stefanowicz & Lori L. Meehan October 2001 It may look like a slam dunk. Suppose that a defendant runs a red light, hits your client's car, and causes your client to suffer substantial physical injuries.
Jury instructions: when is a “normal life” lost? June 2001 Several years ago, I was involved in a trial where the plaintiff was suing my client, a local municipality, because she fractured her leg rather severely while snow sledding with her children.
Liability waivers/releases: when are they enforceable? By Steven R. McMannon & Ana M. McNamara March 2001 This fall my eight-year-old daughter participated in gymnastics, ballet and soccer. She also took Tae Kwon Do and swimming lessons.
Overlapping class actions and the proposed amendments to Rule 23 By James E. Pfander October 2001 During its June 2001 meeting, the Standing Committee on Civil Rules of the Judicial Conference of the United States--the Committee charged with the promulgation of proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure--took up class action reform.
Recent supreme and appellate court opinions in brief March 2001 The supreme court has overruled prior cases regarding the impact of a criminal conviction on a subsequent civil lawsuit resulting from the same incident.
Rule 213 opinion witness case update By Daniel P. Wurl November 2001 This article provides an update on recent decisions in opinion witness disclosure and testimony under Supreme Court Rule 213.
Soto restates the law governing opinion testimony as to permanency of injury By Robert Handley November 2001 A recent decision from the Second Appellate District has reexamined the criteria a trial court should consider in deciding whether a physician may render an opinion on the issue of the permanency of a plaintiff's injuries.
Summary of amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure effective as of December 1, 2000 By Joseph G. Bisceglia March 2001 Certain amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure went into effect on December 1, 2000.
The surprising viability of the self-critical analysis privilege in Illinois federal courts By David M. Greenwald April 2001 Engaged in discovery in a products liability action in federal district court, you find in your client's files a detailed "Safety Report" analyzing the cause of injuries suffered during use of the product at issue in your case.
The use of requests for admission of fact in proving a litigant’s case: what are the limits? April 2001 Illinois Supreme Court Rule 216 allows a party to request another party to admit to "the truth of any specified relevant fact set forth in the request."