Appellate court clarifies how to properly complete a summonsBy Ronald D. Menna, Jr.December 2015Recently, in Arch Bay Holdings, LLC-Series 2010B v. Perez, the Appellate Court set another trap for the unwary plaintiff, holding that service of summons is ineffective where a defendant’s name is not listed on the face of the summons, even though her name is listed on the attachment directing that she be served.
Cases illustrate importance of filing a post-trial motionBy Robert T. ParkOctober 2015Arient and Burkhamer, decided the same day, both demonstrate the necessity of closely following the rules of practice and filing a post-trial motion whenever you seek relief from an unfavorable jury verdict.
A constitutional question about reduced jury sizeBy Robert T. ParkJanuary 2015Public Act 98-1132 goes into effect June 1, 2015. Trial lawyers will be keenly interested in the Act’s change to 735 ILCS 5/2-1105(b), which provides: “All jury cases shall be tried by a jury of 6.”
The importance of knowing and following the rulesBy Nigel SmithMarch 2015A recent Virginia Supreme Court decision illustrates the danger of not paying the entire filing fee for a civil complaint, and then mailing the missing $2, only to have the check arrive at the court clerk’s office beyond the statute of limitations date, causing a $2.5 million personal injury suit to be dismissed.
Judicial “es-top-pel”—Bankruptcy debtors bewareBy Patrick M. KinnallyJune 2015Judicial estoppel applies in cases where a debtor claims an asset not revealed in a bankruptcy filing, and his omission may or may not preclude him from seeking compensation on a viable state law tort claim.
Lawyer investigations into uncertain parentageBy Jeffrey A. ParnessMarch 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.
Love means never having to say you’re sorryBy Hon. Barbara CrowderAugust 2015On July 21, 2015, the Governor signed Public Act 099-0090, creating an end to ‘heart balm’ actions and freeing the citizenry from actions for alienation of affections, breach of promise to marry, and criminal conversation.
McVey v. M.L.K. Enterprises: Proper calculation of the hospital lienBy Hon. Daniel T. Gillespie & Jonathan P. KuhnAugust 2015In McVey v. M.L.K. Enterprises the Illinois Supreme Court overruled Stanton v. Rea and found, unequivocally, that the plain text of the Healthcare Services Lien Act requires that neither attorney’s fees nor costs be deducted before calculating the statutory maximum lien on plaintiff’s award.
Navigating the choppy waters of foreign trade—Chraca v. U.S. Battery Manufacturing CompanyBy Hon. Daniel T. Gillespie & Aaron McKerryMarch 2015In this recent case, the appellate court held that, under section 2-621, subsection (b)(3) of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-621(b)(3)), a plaintiff is entitled to reinstate an action against a product distributor where he can show the product manufacturer is not subject to the personal jurisdiction of the court.
Pennsylvania judge takes a bold stand against unprofessional conductBy David W. Inlander & Ronald D. Menna, Jr.October 2015Recently Judge Paul Panepinto, presiding over a Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, medical malpractice action, imposed a sanction of almost $1 million upon an attorney due to her expert witness’ violation of an agreed order in limine. Could such a sanction be imposed in Illinois to promote attorney professionalism?
Proposed class action not mooted by defendant’s tenderBy Michael R. LiedNovember 2015The important consideration in determining whether a named representative’s claim is moot is whether that representative filed a motion for class certification prior to the time when the defendant made its tender.
Statutory silence on burden of proofBy Jeffrey A. ParnessJune 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.
Substitution of judge as of right is in need of a time restrictionBy Robert I. Berger & Jin YanSeptember 2015A party’s statutory right to a substitution of judge without the need to allege cause is a unique privilege. To prevent abuse of this privilege, the authors argue the statute should be amended to impose time limitations on exercising the right.