![handle is hein.journals/nnislwrsp2 and id is 1 raw text is: Northern Illinois University
Law Review
Volume 2 Spring 2011 Number 1
ONLINE JOURNAL
COMMENTS
The Times They Are a Changin': Enactment of Historic Civil Union Act
Is the Right Step for Illinois
Shannon R. Barnaby ..................................................................1
This Comment analyzes the recent passage of Senate Bill 1716, the
Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act, which
extends the same [state] legal obligations, responsibilities, protec-
tions, and benefits to same- sex couples as are available to hetero-
sexual couples. This Comment begins by discussing the background
of legal recognition for same-sex unions. Next, this Comment dis-
cusses the challenges that same-sex partners and their children were
confronted with due to the lack of legal recognition of their relation-
ships and then delves into counter-arguments to such recognition.
Moreover, this Comment argues that the legislature took the correct
and honorable action in enacting the Illinois Religious Freedom
Protection and Civil Union Act because it was proper to extended
equality to all persons, as our constitution promises. Further, this
Comment argues that the Civil Union Act will strengthen society by
allowing same-sex couples and their children to take part in the
benefits of a legally recognized union.
Nolan & Ready Settling for Less than Perfect in Illinois when
Determining the Role Defendants Play in the Litigation After They
Settle
Benjamin W. Meyer .................................................................35
This Note examines the interplay of two decisions made by the
Illinois Supreme Court during their 2008 - 2009 term Ready v.
United/Goedecke Services, Inc. and Nolan v. WEIL-McLain.
Interpreting the statutory wording of the Illinois joint and several
liability statute (735 ILCS 5/2-1117), Ready held that settled defen-
dants may not be included on jury verdict forms when apportioning
fault. The later decided Nolan held that a defendant may submit
evidence of settled defendants in support of his sole proximate cause
defense.
This Note points out that the Nolan decision renders the Ready
decision unworkable, because once a jury is exposed to the evidence
of settled defendants, the jury will consider that evidence when
apportioning fault, regardless of whether the settled defendants'
names appear on the jury verdict form. Furthermore, the result of
the Ready decision is that the remaining defendants in the litigation
will be forced to bear the liability that is unable to be apportioned to
ii](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/nnislwrsp2&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most