With the Illinois Supreme Court between terms, coverage in the news and on the blogs has been relatively light over the past two weeks. Christopher Wills of the Associated Press reported on the Court’s decision in Karbin v. Karbin, authorizing the guardians of disabled adults to file divorce petitions with the approval of the Court. Our … Continue Reading
In Illinois, an action against a lawyer "arising out of an act or omission in the performance of professional services" can’t be brought more than 6 years after the act or omission occurred. 735 ILC 5/13-214.3. But does the statute apply if the plaintiff is someone other than the client? The Illinois Supreme Court will soon answer … Continue Reading
In the final days of its September term, the Illinois Supreme Court allowed a petition for review in Standard Mutual Insurance Co. v. Lay. [pdf] In Lay, the Court will decide whether the Federal statutory penalty for sending junk faxes is in the nature of punitive damages, and thus uninsurable under Illinois law. The defendant in … Continue Reading
This morning, the Illinois Supreme Court filed its unanimous opinion in Karbin v. Karbin. In an opinion by Justice Charles E. Freeman, the Court overruled its twenty-six year old decision in In re Marriage of Drews and held that the plenary guardian of a disabled adult may file a divorce petition on the ward’s behalf. Following … Continue Reading
Workers’ compensation payments are excluded from income for purposes of federal income taxes. But are they “income” for purposes of calculating a party’s child support obligation? At the close of its September term, the Illinois Supreme Court announced it would resolve this question in Mayfield v. Mayfield. Mayfield presents two questions: (1) is a lump-sum workers’ compensation … Continue Reading
During its May term, the Illinois Supreme Court decided Harris v. Thompson, which posed the question of whether a public entity or employee could be held liable for negligent operation of an ambulance. At the close of its September term, the Court allowed a petition for review in Wilkins v. Williams. Wilkins poses the inevitable follow-up question … Continue Reading
Our reports on the oral arguments of the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term conclude with Hope Clinic for Women v. Adams. In Hope Clinic, the Court confronts the question of whether the Illinois constitution offers greater protection to privacy and gender equality interests than the Federal constitution. To watch the video of the argument, click here. Our … Continue Reading
Our reports on the oral arguments of the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term continue with Ferguson v. Patton. Ferguson involves a potentially important issue for the growing field of government ethics law: can the ethics officer sue another official of the same government entity to enforce his or her subpoenas? To watch the video of the argument, … Continue Reading
Our reports on the oral arguments of the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term continue with Mashal v. City of Chicago. Mashal presents an issue of potentially enormous importance to class action practice in the Illinois state courts: when does the Circuit Court lose the power to decertify the class under Section 2-802 of the Code of … Continue Reading
Our reports on the oral arguments of the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term continue with Fennell v. Illinois Central Railroad Co. Fennell presents the issue of whether a case with no apparent connection to Illinois, filed here after an initial lawsuit was thrown out of plaintiff’s first choice forum (and home state), could remain in Illinois. To … Continue Reading
Our reports on the oral arguments of the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term continue with Rodriquez v. Department of Financial and Professional Regulation. To watch the video, click here. The facts and holding below are set forth in detail in our preview of the argument. Here’s the question – when you get an administrative rule struck down, … Continue Reading
Our reports on the oral arguments of the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term continue with In re Estate of Boyar. Can you accept money from your parents’ will and then challenge it in court? No; that’s settled in nearly every state. But, as counsel for the trustee in Boyar told the Court, living trusts have become … Continue Reading
Our reports on the oral arguments of the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term continue with Toftoy v. Rosenwinkel. Toftoy is an interesting case because it presents a textbook example of a clash between two classic forms of legal analysis. Professor Ward Farnsworth discusses the distinction at length in his classic book The Legal Analyst: the conflict … Continue Reading
Our reports on the oral arguments of the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term continue with Mathis v. Mathis. Mathis presents a question which frequently arises in divorce proceedings: when a significant period passes between the divorce and the property settlement, what is the date on which the property is valued? For the first time in the term, … Continue Reading
Our reports on the oral arguments of the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term continue with EMC Mortgage Corp. v. Kemp. Kemp presents the question of when a home foreclosure may be appealed. The facts and lower court opinions in Kemp are described in detail here. Based upon the Court’s questions, it seems reasonably likely that the Court … Continue Reading
Our reports on the oral arguments of the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term continue with Carr v. Koch. In Carr, the taxpayer plaintiffs are challenging Circuit Court and Appellate Court decisions that they lacked standing to challenge the state’s education funding statute; but based on the Court’s questioning, it appears unlikely that their suit will be … Continue Reading
Our reports on the oral arguments of the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term continue with Cooney v. Rossiter, a case about the breadth of immunity for court-appointed psychologists in child custody cases. Based on the questions at argument, the Court appeared to be searching for alternatives short of limiting the scope of such experts’ immunity. The … Continue Reading
A casual viewer might be forgiven after watching the oral argument last week in Center Partners, Ltd. v. Growth Head GP, LLC for being uncertain exactly what the law of Illinois was regarding the applicability of subject matter waiver to disclosures of attorney-client communications outside litigation. In a nearly hour-long debate, opposing counsel presented diametrically opposed … Continue Reading
With this post, we begin our reports on the oral arguments for the Illinois Supreme Court’s September term. In Hernandez v. Bernstein, the first civil case of the term, the Court seems likely to hold that plaintiff’s two successive complaints were alternative versions of a single claim, meaning that plaintiff’s voluntary dismissal without prejudice of the … Continue Reading
One of the quirky pleasures of every first-year law student’s property class is the amount of time taken up studying rules which were settled around the time that the Tudors were on the British throne — sometimes even earlier. On Thursday, the Illinois Supreme Court brought back one of the classics, a rule first propounded … Continue Reading
At least in theory, the days are long gone in most jurisdictions when courts were openly hostile to arbitration. Nevertheless, petitions to arbitrate are a frequent battleground between plaintiffs and defendants. On Thursday, a unanimous Illinois Supreme Court offered important guidance for determining such petitions, filing its decision in Carter v. SSC Odin Operating Co. Carter arises … Continue Reading
The doctrine of equitable estoppel bars a party from denying a fact, or opposing a claim, based on that party’s previous statements or conduct. As a general rule, depending on the circumstances, it can be based on either actual authority, meaning that the speaker or actor had authority to bind the defendant, or apparent authority: the … Continue Reading
For generations, Illinois has recognized the general principle that a landowner owes no duty of reasonable care to trespassers. This duty is subject to a number of exceptions; one pertains to children. Since Kahn v. James Burton Co., Illinois has applied a three-step test to determining whether a duty is owed to a child trespasser: (1) the … Continue Reading
Resolution of child custody issues — and particularly, the issue of removing the children from the jurisdiction — is often one of the most contentious points in a divorce proceeding. On Thursday, the Illinois Supreme Court handed down a decision in In re Marriage of Coulter which should make it easier for parties to resolve such … Continue Reading
