Browse articles by year:

2019 Articles

The Basics of Preparing for E-Discovery By George Bellas & Jillian Tattersall September 2019 As discovery increasingly focuses on electronically stored information, it is important to have a working knowledge of the many issues associated with e-discovery.
Book review: ‘Adjudicating Illinois: Justices of the Illinois Supreme Court’ By Judge Barb Crowder, (ret.) June 2019 A review of John Lupton's book, ‘Adjudicating Illinois: Justices of the Illinois Supreme Court.'
Discovery and the Circle of Trust Knowledge By Judge Eugene Doherty August 2019 The purpose of discovery is the transmission of knowledge from one party to the other. But what constitutes “knowledge” of information sufficient to trigger the duty to disclose?
Does a guardian ad litem have immunity in a minor’s guardianship proceeding? By Patrick Kinnally January 2019 In Vlastelica v. Brend, the appellate court held that a child representative in a family law case enjoys absolute immunity from civil liability claims of legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, and interference with a parent’s child custody rights.
‘I didn’t mean it!’: Changing deposition testimony with errata sheets By George Bellas & Svetlana Meltser June 2019 Errata sheets allow a witness to make changes to transcripts prior to submitting it as part of discovery, but to what extent can they be used to correct or corrupt testimony?
Illinois Supreme Court Rules Delayed Lakefront Trail Repair by Park District Does Not Rise to Willful and Wanton Misconduct By Andrea L. Kmak & Kimberly A. Davis August 2019 The Illinois Supreme Court recently issued a ruling in Cohen v. The Chicago Park District that examined the application of certain sections of the Tort Immunity Act in an injury case.
Illinois Supreme Court upholds 50/50 split on crossclaim for contribution by one ‘blameless’ principal of a common agent against another By Andrea L. Kmak & Kimberly A. Davis February 2019 The Illinois Supreme Court held in Sperl v. Henry, et al. that the Contribution Act may be applied to apportion liability between two principals that are vicariously liable for the same agent’s negligence.
A keepsake: The Due Process Clause in civil litigation—People v. Gawlak By Patrick M. Kinnally March 2019 In People v. Gawlak, the Illinois Supreme Court considered whether the circuit court arbitrarily violated the due process rights of a defendant
Letter to the Editor Re: Rules of Professional Conduct By Gary L. Schlesinger September 2019 A discussion on the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 7.1, Communications Concerning a Lawyer's Services.
Lost text messages lead to sanctions By George Bellas March 2019 Schmalz v. Village of North Riverside, et al. highlights the importance of taking measures to preserve data from mobile devices, as well as the risks associated with failing to take such measures.
May a Guardian Ad Litem Under the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act File Pleadings? By Gary L. Schlesinger August 2019 Guardians ad litem have the right and the duty to file pleadings to protect the interest of the ward.
Medical testimony and the “reasonable degree of medical certainty” standard By Mark Rouleau January 2019 The meaning of "reasonable degree of medical certainty" is often misunderstood by physicians, making it extremely important to explain this legal term to a client’s treating physicians before their depositions are taken.
Orders of Protection Cases Often Involve Surprises By Gary L. Schlesinger & Rachael Bernal August 2019 It is going to be exceedingly easy now for respondents in order of protection cases to be blindsided or have to defend things that are not specified in a petition if those items testified to fall within section 214 of the Domestic Violence Act.
Sole Proximate Cause(s) By Hon. Eugene G. Doherty September 2019 There appears to be a split in authority about how to take the word "sole" in the phrase "sole proximate cause."
Will the real Jesse Gurley please accept service By John J. Holevas February 2019 In Pickens v. Aahmes Temple #132 LLC, the appellate court upheld the trial court’s ruling that service of process was proper when the defendant listed the name of its registered agent but failed to include the agent’s correct suffix when another person by the same name with a different suffix was the individual actually served.