Tort Trends

The newsletter of the ISBA’s Section on Tort Law

2009 Articles

The admissibility of other acts or occurrences By John M. Stalmack September 2009 An analysis of those instances in which the admissibility of other occurrences or other acts may be admissible in a given case.
Brainlash: Be aware of this insidious disorder By Scott A. Berndtson June 2009 When you interview your next whiplash-injured client be alert for other latent problems resulting from a brainlash as well and what to do if they exist.
Case Note: Forsythe, et al. v. Clark USA, Inc. By Kevin T. Veugeler September 2009 In a case of first impression, the Illinois Supreme Court has recognized a cause of action against a parent company for the actions of its subsidiary that results in a workplace injury.
Editor’s note By John L. Nisivaco October 2009 Thank you to all of the contributors. The articles are excellent and we hope you find the materials helpful. ■
Editor’s note By John L. Nisivaco September 2009 An introduction to the issue from Editor John Nisivaco.
Editor’s note By John L. Nisivaco June 2009 An introduction to the issue from Editor John Nisivaco.
Editor’s note By John L. Nisivaco May 2009 An introduction to the issue from editor John Nisivaco. 
The ethics of fee sharing in tort law cases By Albert E. Durkin October 2009 In the field of plaintiff personal injury litigation, a substantial amount of business is received on a referral basis. Tort practitioners commonly are referred cases from fellow lawyers who do not practice in that chosen field.  
Missed diagnoses: Routine is the enemy of good medicine By William A. Cirignani May 2009 A primer for handling medical malpractice cases.
Plaintiff’s wrongful death claim on behalf of fetus allowed despite plaintiff’s agreement to terminate pregnancy By Scott D. Lane June 2009 Can a plaintiff pursue a wrongful death claim for the death of a fetus where the plaintiff agreed to terminate the pregnancy?
The progeny of Arthur v. Catour By James K. Theisen May 2009 How much can a plaintiff be awarded for medical bills if the plaintiff’s health insurance pays the medical bills at a discounted rate? Should the plaintiff receive an award for the full amount or just the discounted amount? How much can a plaintiff be awarded for medical expenses provided free of charge? These questions are answered by the collateral source rule.
When consultants’ opinions are discoverable By Lauryn E. Parks & James F. McCluskey October 2009 The purpose of Illinois Rule 201(b)(3), as well as other comparable rules, is focused on protecting the identity of the consultant in order to encourage the communication of expertise.