Source: https://www.isba.org/sections/civilpractice/newsletter/titles/2007?page=1
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 02:36:08+00:00

Document:
Petitions for relief from judgments under 735 ILCS 5/2-1401 By Kimberly A. Davis and James F. McCluskey April 2007 Pursuant to the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, a litigant is allowed the proverbial two bites at the apple to vacate a default order or other final order or judgment.
Practice in the Central District of Illinois By Hon. Michael P. McCuskey March 2007 The important thing that civil practitioners need to understand about federal court is that, unlike state court, their assigned district court judge has both a civil and criminal docket, which means that the Speedy Trial Act causes criminal trials to take priority over trial dates in civil cases.
Re-direct examination, the right to rehabilitate an expert By Bridget A. Mitchell April 2007 In Shaheen v Advantage Moving and Storage, Inc., 369 Ill. App.3d 535, 860 N.E.2d 375, 307 Ill.Dec. 721 (1st Dist.2006), the appellate court examines the plaintiff’s right to rehabilitate his expert, a treating physician who is offering expert testimony in the case.
Reasonableness and the admission of an unpaid bill into evidence: Kunz v. Little Company of Mary Hospital and Health Care Centers By Hon. James G. Fitzgerald Smith September 2007 In this medical malpractice case, the First District Appellate Court interpreted Arthur v. Catour, 216 Ill. 2d 72, 833 N.E.2d 847 (2005), an Illinois Supreme Court case that held for the first time that unpaid medical bills may be introduced into evidence under the collateral source rule.
Recent developments under Batson By Kathryn R. Hoying June 2007 In the matter of Mack v. Anderson, the appellate court addressed the seminal case on the prohibition against racial discrimination in jury selection, Batson v. Kentucky, and reversed the trial court’s denial of plaintiffs’ Batson motion.
The saga of admissibility of vehicular post-collision photographs continues By Stephen C. Buser March 2007 The First District Appellate Court decided nearly four years ago in Dicosola v. Bowman, 342 Ill.App. 3d 530, 794 N.E. 2d 875, 276 Ill.Dec.625 (1st Dist. 2003) that vehicular post-collision photographs were not admissible in automobile accident litigation absent expert testimony.
Supreme Court finds patient privacy violation outside scope of employment By Hon. Kimberly L. Dahlen June 2007 The issue in Bagent v. Blessing Care Corp., was whether Illini Community Hospital could be held vicariously liable under a theory of respondeat superior for a phlebotomist’s disclosure of a patient’s confidential medical information to a third party at a tavern while off duty.
Vision Point v. Haas: Breathing room For litigants on Requests to Admit By Steven G. Pietrick October 2007 On September 20, 2007, the Illinois Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in Vision Point of Sale, Inc. v. Haas, providing what many in the legal community perceive as a merciful relaxation of the overly strict interpretation of Rule 216’s requirements and the near-draconian effects which can result.
When is an expert not really an expert? By Michael J. Marovich October 2007 In the case of Somers v. Quinn, the plaintiff appealed the trial court’s granting of defendant’s motion in limine to bar plaintiff’s expert’s testimony and the court’s refusal to grant plaintiff a continuance to find another expert.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.