Illinois Lawyer Blog

Read an interesting case today on the issue future damages. In Maddox v. Rozek, the First District Appellate Court of Illinois was faced with an issue involving future damages. Specifically, after a verdict for plaintiff in an auto case, the defense appealed, arguing that the jury should never have received an instruction on future pain and suffering because their was no expert[i.e. doctor]witness who testified that plaintiff would have problems in the future.

After surveying the law, the Court held that where future pain and suffering can be objectively determined from the nature of the injury, the jury may be instructed on future pain and suffering based solely on lay testimony. When future pain and suffering is not apparent based simply on the injury, or is subjective, the plaintiff is obligated to present expert testimony.

Bottom line? If your client doesn't have a cringe-inducing injury[loss of an eye is an example cited by the Court] get an expert.

This doesn't happen in Cook County very often.

I had a hearing in a Courtroom with a judge who is universally well-regarded. This particular judge is a seasoned, thoughtful, conscientious man who understands the stress that lawyers occasionally have to endure.

The case in question is a mass tort sort of thing. Let's leave it at that. In other words, lots of lawyers involved.

The case was called and no less than 20 lawyers assemble before the bench. The Judge then announces to all that he wants to apologize to a lawyer. He goes on to explain that during a hearing the previous week he had cut the lawyer off and not allowed him to fully explain his position. The judge concludes by saying his conduct was improper, and that he wanted to acknowledge his error and apologize directly to the lawyer. A moment of complete silence - another rarity in a Cook County courtroom. I'm guessing none of the lawyers in the courtroom has experienced anything remotely similiar. I know I haven't in 23 years of practice.

The attorney in question, understandably, was a bit taken aback. To his eternal credit, he simply responded that the apology was totally unnecessary. And then we got to the hearing.

A remarkably gracious act from a terrific judge. It would be really nice to see more people like him sitting on the bench.