Practice News

In the latest Tort Trends, Tim Kelly reviews the relevant cases and concludes that -- despite arguments to the contrary by hopeful plaintiffs' lawyers -- trial judges in Illinois have discretion to admit photos showing only minor damage to the plaintiff's car. Not surprisingly, the plaintiffs' bar would prefer that defendants be required to provide expert testimony showing a relationship between damage to the car and injury to the plaintiff (just because the car wasn't hurt much doesn't mean the plaintiff wasn't, they argue). But expert testimony isn't required, at least not since the first district's 2003 ruling in Dicosola v Bowman, Kelly writes. But in a comment to Kelly's article (yes, section members can now comment on newsletter articles!), Bob Park says that recent first district cases "leave little doubt that the [court] has abandoned the rule of trial court discretion in the admission of photographic evidence and now requires expert testimony to admit vehicle photos." A bad thing, he argues. It's an interesting, informative exchange. View it here. For more articles like this, join the Tort Section here.

Not long after the Home Repair and Remodeling Act was passed in 2000, lawyers discovered a troubling omission, one that caused confusion and, inevitably, litigation. The problem? Nowhere does the Act specify the remedy for a violation. Suppose Joe the Contractor neglects to give Susie Homeowner the consumer-rights brochure required by the statute. Does that mean Joe can't sue Susie for not paying his repair bill? As Adam Whiteman notes in his excellent article in the latest Real Property newsletter, the Act "has been the subject of nine separate appellate decisions" and "has already made it to the Illinois Supreme Court" in its short lifetime. To address the "what's the remedy?" problem, the ISBA has proposed legislation specifying that, in Whiteman's words, "a private citizens' proper remedy for a violation of the Home Repair Act is to be found in the Consumer Fraud Act." Read the article to find out more. For more articles like that one, join the Real Estate Law Section. What, can't join the section because you aren't an ISBA member? Join now.

The Florida Bar makes audio CDs of its law program available each year to ISBA members. Members are allowed to listen to this program for Florida credit. Contact Joyce Williams in the ISBA's Chicago Office at (312) 726-8775 to make an appointment.

Asked and Answered By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC Q. We are a small four attorney firm and recently lost a secretary that had also been doing our billing and bookkeeping. Frankly, while we have been using a secretary for this function in the past – we believe we need to hire someone with more accounting skills than we have had in the past. What should we be looking for? A. Many law firms in the six attorney and under size have shared with us their frustration in staffing the billing and accounting function. Often their investment in computerized billing and accounting systems fails to yield desired results due to poor accounting and management skills. Many small law firms assume that legal secretaries also have requisite accounting and management skills. This author’s experience has been that often this is not the case. Training, skills, and work behaviors are often different. Bookkeepers/accountants and secretaries are different animals. Many small firms are better off creating an accounting/bookkeeping position and staffing the position with a qualified bookkeeper/accountant. For many firms under six attorneys that have fully automated the billing and accounting function and have distributed time entry, this is not a full-time position. In such instances many firms have either recruited a part-time bookkeeper/accountant solely for the accounting function or have created a combined position of office manager/bookkeeper. This justified a full-time position.