The Bar News

Bar News Sections

Practice News

  • March 25, 2015 | Practice News
    Ethics Question of the Week: Can I file multiple defenses for my client?

    Q. I am not sure what is the best defense to assert while defending my client. May I file numerous defenses in the hopes that one of them will work?

    A. IRPC 3.1 forbids the filling of frivolous claims. Comment [2] to Rule 3.1 states that “the filing of an action or defense or similar action taken for a client is not frivolous merely because the facts have not first been fully substantiated or because the lawyer expects to develop vital evidence only by discovery. What is required of lawyers, however, is that they inform themselves about the facts of their clients’ cases and the applicable law and determine that they can make good-faith arguments in support of their clients’ positions. Such action is not frivolous even though the lawyer believes that the clients’ position ultimately will not prevail. The action is frivolous, however, if the lawyer is unable to either make a good-faith argument on the merits of the action taken or to support the action taken by a good-faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law.” 

    ISBA members can browse past ISBA Ethics Opinions, access our Ethics Hotline, and other resources on the ISBA Ethics Page.

  • March 25, 2015 | Practice News
    Best Practice: Proper compensation and profit margins for Of Counsel attorneys

    By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

    Q. I am the managing partner in an eight attorney firm in Phoenix. We are contemplating bringing in a senior lawyer as an Of Counsel that wants to gradually wind down his practice. We are thinking of paying him using an eat-what-he-kills approach whereby he would be paid 40% for his personal production (collected working attorney receipts) and 20% for bringing in the client (origination). Thus, if he brought in the client and did all of the work he would get 60% of the fee. What are your thoughts?

  • March 19, 2015 | Practice News
    Quick takes on Thursday's Illinois Supreme Court opinions

    Our panel of leading appellate attorneys review Thursday's Illinois Supreme Court opinions in the civil cases Brunton v. Kruger, Cowper v. Nyberg, Skaperdas v. Country Casualty Ins. Co. and Harris v. One Hope United, Inc and provide short summaries for In People ex rel. Madigan v. J. T. Einoder, Inc., McCormick v. Robertson and In re Parentage of Scarlett Z.-D.

    CIVIL

    Brunton v. Kruger

    By Alyssa M. Reiter, Williams, Montgomery & John Ltd.

  • March 19, 2015 | Practice News
    ISBA Statehouse Review for the week of March 19, 2015

    ISBA Director of Legislative Affairs Jim Covington reviews legislation in Springfield of interest to ISBA members. This week he covers Court reporters, Attorney fees in civil actions (House Bill 2456), Product liability and confidentiality orders (House Bill 3518), Property fraud alert system (House Bill 3672), Guilty pleas (House Bill 2569) and The Notice and Opportunity to Repair Act (House Bill 3744). More information on each bill is available below the video.

  • March 19, 2015 | Practice News
    Ethics Question of the Week: What info can I reveal if I have to sue client?

    Q. If I’m forced to sue my client for a fee, can I disclose in pleadings or in open court the services I rendered to the client or is that breaching a confidence?

    A. Rule 1.6 provides broadly that a lawyer shall not reveal “information relating to the representation of a client.”   However, subpart (b)(5) of the Rule allows a lawyer to reveal such information “to establish a claim or defense on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy between the lawyer and the client.”  Comment [11] to the Rule notes “a lawyer entitled to a fee is permitted by (b)(5) to prove the services rendered in an action to collect it.” 

    ISBA members can browse past ISBA Ethics Opinions, access our Ethics Hotline, and other resources on the ISBA Ethics Page.

  • March 18, 2015 | People | Practice News
    Bertschy appointed to ARDC

    ISBA Past President Timothy Bertschy has been appointed as a member of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission. He fills the vacancy created by the resignation of Stuart R. Lefstein for a term expiring Dec. 31, 2015, and until a successor is appointed. Bertschy is the managing partner of Heyl Royster in Peoria.

    1 comment (Most recent March 19, 2015)
  • March 18, 2015 | Practice News
    Best Practice: 1st steps for law firm mergers

    Asked and Answered

    By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

    Q. We are a 17-attorney firm in Dayton, Ohio. Several of our founding partners are retiring and we have been contemplating a merger with another law firm but are not sure where to start. I would appreciate your ideas.

    A. Start by determining your merger objectives. Why do you want to merge? What do you hope to achieve? Is merger compatible with your strategic plan? What size of firm are you considering?

    Once you are sure that merger exploration - in general - makes sense - you should insure that your house is in order. In other words - can anything be done to enhance the value and/or marketability of your firm? For example:

  • March 17, 2015 | Practice News
    Illinois Supreme Court disbars 5, suspends 11 in latest disciplinary filing

    The Supreme Court of Illinois announced the filing of lawyer disciplinary orders on March 12, 2015, during the March Term of Court. Sanctions were imposed because the lawyers engaged in professional misconduct by violating state ethics law.

  • March 16, 2015 | Practice News
    Bugos appointed associate judge in DuPage County

    Chief Circuit Judge Kathryn E. Creswell is pleased to announce that following a tabulation of ballots, the Circuit Judges of the 18th Judicial Circuit, DuPage County, have appointed Joseph T. Bugos to the position of Associate Judge.

  • March 13, 2015 | Practice News
    Illinois Supreme Court invites governor, legislators to special evening session of oral argument

    Chief Justice Rita B. Garman and the Illinois Supreme Court have scheduled a special evening session of oral argument on Tuesday, March 17, and have invited Gov. Bruce Rauner and the entire Illinois legislature to observe the Court in session. It is uncertain when an evening session was last held in the Illinois Supreme Court Building, but it is believed to have been more than a century ago.

    The Court will hear oral arguments in a case involving an amendment passed by the legislature to the Illinois Juvenile Court Act. A portion of the amendment was ruled unconstitutional by a Circuit Court and the case is on direct appeal to the Supreme Court.

    Chief Justice Garman explained that the special evening session is an opportunity for members of the General Assembly to observe first-hand the interaction of the functions of the three branches of government and the operation of the checks and balances essential to our system.

    "The case involves an amendment that was debated and passed by the legislature, signed by the Governor, applied by the State in an individual case, challenged by a defendant, and declared unconstitutional by the Circuit Court," said Chief Justice Garman. "It affords a window into how our constitutional system operates and the balance among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches."

    1 comment (Most recent March 16, 2015)