Section Newsletters

Articles From John B. Kincaid

Jurisdiction over the Internet: Innovative Garage Door Co. v. High Ranking Domains, LLC, 2012 Ill.App. (2d) 120117 (Dec. 3, 2012) By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, April 2013 The facts in the recent Innovative Garage Door case raise a new quandary for the plaintiff’s attorney intent on haling a foreign-based Internet company into an Illinois court.
Can we e-file a notice of appeal By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, July 2012 On April 16, 2012, the Second District in VC&M, LTD v. Andrews, held that an e-filed notice of appeal from DuPage County was ineffective to confer jurisdiction upon the Appellate Court.
Can a statutory jury instruction (60.01) include a driver’s license restriction? By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, January 2012 To include a statutory instruction in 60.01, the statute must be intended to protect against the type of injury in question and there must be a causal connection to the statute and the injured party must be within the class of protected persons.
1 comment (Most recent January 13, 2012)
Intrusion upon seclusion: A new tort? By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, June 2011 Notwithstanding the lack of endorsement or approval from the Illinois Supreme Court, there is sufficient Appellate Court approval for intrusion upon seclusion in Illinois.
SLAPP has a bite By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, November 2010 In a flurry of appellate activity, Illinois now has four interpretations of the Citizen’s Participation Act--the first published appellate decisions interpreting the legislative purpose of the SLAPP statute passed by the Illinois Legislature in 2007.
1 comment (Most recent December 15, 2010)
Fiduciary duty revisited By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, September 2010 A look at the recent case of Prignano v. Prignano, which in addition to fiduciary duty matters, also stands for current rulings on hearsay, interpretation of the Dead Man’s Act (735 ILCS 8-201) and the duty of a beneficiary to object to the premature closing of an estate and set off.
Thornton, known for emotional distress, is notable for the Single Recovery Rule and set offs By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, March 2010 Thornton v. Garcini, (2009 WL 3471065) was decided by the Illinois Supreme Court in a concise compact opinion authored by Justice Kilbride on October 29, 2009. The case raises issues unique to the civil practice arena as well as the medical negligence forum. As of the preparation of these remarks, the opinion remains subject to revision or withdrawal.
Time is of the essence, or is it? By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, October 2009 Two recent Rule 23 Orders decided by separate panels of the Second District Appellate Court appear to conflict as to whether a court can limit the cross-examination of a witness or the submission of evidence which supports the litigant’s case.
Minimal property damage as evidence of non-injury By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, December 2008 Despite the youth of the century, the Twenty-First has already spawned six cases from four Appellate Court districts dealing with defense efforts to establish lack of plaintiff’s injury by showing minimal vehicle contact.
Attorney’s caveat—Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 USC §1681 By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, May 2008 For a country lawyer who spends little time in the Federal Court, it was an eye-opening experience for me to realize that attorneys can run afoul of the Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act with little effort.
Attorney’s retaining lien, circa 1889 By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, March 2006 Contrary to the popular misconception of many attorneys and judges, including this writer, Illinois has, since 1889, recognized and enforced the right of an attorney to retain his physical file until the client has paid for his services. 
Rescission/Restitution: Be careful what you ask for, you may get it By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, November 2005 The subject of this article involves the doctrine of contract rescission and the court’s application of restitution following the order of rescission.
Does a lending institution have a duty to a potential guarantor of a promissory note to advise him that his future business partners are financially shaky and may not repay the loan? By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, February 2004 In a recent case which must have sent shudders through the banking community, the First District Appellate Court held that such conduct is actionable.
Negligent infliction of emotional distress in Illinois—Rickey v. CTA revisited By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, February 2002 In the 18 years since Rickey v. Chicago Transit Authority was decided by the Illinois Supreme Court, recovery for emotional distress due to negligence has undergone some significant evolution.
The deliberative process evidentiary privilege (Civil Practice Committee 1/5/00) By John B. Kincaid Civil Practice and Procedure, August 2000 In People Ex. Rel. Birkett v. City of Chicago, the City raised a "deliberative process privilege" to prevent the disclosure of future plans to improve and enlarge the O'Hare Field facility.

Spot an error in your article? Contact Celeste Niemann at cniemann@isba.org. For information on obtaining a copy of an article, visit the ISBA Newsletters page.

Select a Different Author