14th Annual Circuit Court Boot Camp: The Nuts and Bolts (IL) [OnDemand Streaming and Recorded Packages]

What You Will Learn

Agenda

 Part 1: Tuesday, December 10, 2024
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. Central Time

Judge Commenting throughout Part 1:  Hon. Patricia O’Brien Sheahan

1:00 p.m. – 2:15 p.m.
The Early Parts of your Case: Themes, Complaints, Answers, and More.
Ed Samuelson and Mona Naser

• Early case assessment and themes
• The Complaint – rules, advice and strategies
• Answering the complaint
• Defenses vs. Affirmative Defenses
• Motions directed at the pleadings

• • Motions to dismiss
  • MTDs v. Answers
  • Motions for a more definite statement
  • Motions to strike

• Case Management Conference / Scheduling Your Case

2:15 p.m. – 2:25 p.m.
BREAK

2:25 p.m. – 3:45 p.m.
Depositions
Brian Eldridge and Ian Fisher 

• State v. Federal Rules
• Timelines and Deadlines
• Deciding whom to depose
• Taking good depositions – mistakes not to make
• Making effective use of depositions at trial
• Using depositions for settlement talks
• Objections to depositions
• Dealing with difficult counsel
• Bringing in the judge
• Preparing your client
• Preparing your expert witness
• Deposition related sanctions motions

3:45 p.m. – 3:50 p.m.
BREAK

3:50 p.m. – 4:30 p.m.
Other Motions
Kim Walberg 

• Continuances
• Ex Parte Motions
• TROs and Preliminary Injunctions
• Sanctions
• Common hearings

• • Differences between various hearings, such as Ex Parte, Evidentiary, MSJ and other standard issue hearings.

4:30 p.m. – 4:45 p.m.
Oral Argument Tips and final q/a
All speakers 

 

Part 2: Thursday, December 12, 2024
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. Central Time

Judge Commenting throughout Part 2:  Hon. Brendan A. O’Brien

1:00 p.m. – 2:35 p.m.
Discovery & E-Discovery
Kristen Hudson and Paul Coogan

• Deciding what matters to your case
• New discovery / E-Discovery rules
• Scope of discovery / proportionality
• Interrogatories, Requests for Production and responses
• Failure to preserve / sanctions
• Subpoenas and Affidavits
• Meet and confer requirements/creating a good record
• Considerations for trial and settlement
• Key Rules, Timelines and Overlooked Deadlines
• Common Procedural Issues
• Preparing your client
• Preparing your expert witness
• Motions to Compel/for Protective Order
• Sanctions
• Cost cutting measures
• Dealing with unresponsive opposing counsel
• E-Discovery: Costs, Authentication, Sources and preservation
• Important state cases

2:35 p.m. – 2:45 p.m.
BREAK

2:45 p.m. – 3:50 p.m.
Motions for Summary Judgment
Kevin Turkcan and Heather Adams 

• Timing
• Strategic considerations
• Cost considerations
• Writing Persuasive Briefs

• • Intro
  • Headers
  • Content
  • Conclusion
• Mistakes to Avoid
• What judges want, need and don’t want to see

3:50 p.m. – 3:55 p.m.
BREAK

3:55 p.m. – 4:35 p.m.
Pre-Trial Matters
Heidi Wickstrom 

• Pretrial Conference and Order
• Trial Briefs
• Pretrial Statement
• Motions in Limine
• Final Status Conference
• Trier of Fact Decisions

4:35 p.m. – 4:45 p.m.
Final Questions and tips from the bench

Testimonials

“Very well organized and well-run. The speakers were individually impressive & cohesive. Not only was the content extraordinarily helpful, but the speakers also exuded the competence, professionalism, and confidence that makes a great trial attorney & lawyer.” – Katherine Eller, Esq.

“This was great! The speakers were very knowledgeable and could give real world examples.” – James Garfield, Esq.

“This was very thorough walk-through of the nuts and bolts of litigation practice in Illinois state courts, with which I have had little experience thus this was very helpful.” – Andrew Webb, Esq.

“Excellent CLE and tons of practical advice. I really appreciate the handout as I would not have been able to write down all the great information.” – Kaitlyn Harris-Hertel, Esq.

“I learned a lot from these speakers. They were clearly experts and knew how to explain the subject matter clearly.” – Elizabeth Temkin, Esq.

“It was very useful. The handout materials were great!” – Ellen M. Harris, Esq.

“It was substantive and well-organized. I appreciated how detailed it was.” – Nicholas Lurie-Moroni, Esq.

“Very useful, I gained important info.” – Tuleen Zain, Esq.

“Well-organized and the materials were abundant and useful.” – Barry Boykin, Esq.

“It was an excellent program! I’ve tried a few cases, and I definitely felt like I learned something! This was a useful and interesting course, even if you’ve been practicing for a while.” – Elizabeth Homsy, Esq.

“Very satisfied.” – Dale Lichtenstein, Esq.

“I thought that the speakers were knowledgeable, engaging and they engaged in good, substantive conversation. I like that the boot camp substantively addressed multiple areas of civil practice.” – Nicholas Lurie-Moroni, Esq.

“It was engaging!” – Rebecca Strauss, Esq.

“Excellent! I found the second day to be particularly helpful in getting to know how judges think about these sorts of things.” – Elizabeth Homsy, Esq.

“The program was very well done.” – Barry Boykin, Esq.

“Excellent program and extremely beneficial!” – Peter Benke Esq.

“This was one of the best CLE’s I have attended this year.” – John A. Doerrer, Esq.

“Great overview. Great practical, real-life experience, especially for new attorneys.” – Aaron Curry, Esq.

“Incredible program that provides valuable insight from judges and practitioners in a way that is accessible to younger attorneys.” – Marc Pawlus, Esq.

“Excellent. Good job with speakers.” – Thushan Sabaratnam, Esq.

“Extremely helpful to have the judge’s perspective. Ms. Haidostian was also very insightful and organized.” – Kaitlin Cutshaw, Esq.

“This program should be mandatory for all new attorneys.” – Anthony McMahon, Esq.

“This was extremely helpful for my practice.” – Lhea Keller, Esq.

“It was very helpful to my practice, especially helpful having judges on the panel. Speakers were very informed and made specific reference to the rules.” – Nathan Nash, Esq.

“This is a great program for new attorneys or well-practiced attorneys looking to brush up on some practice skills. Great content and well presented.” – Matthew Dudek, Esq.

“I thought it was great. The presenters and slides were very informative. I found the pleadings session more relevant to my practice as a legal aid attorney. Everything was clear and the responses to the questions were helpful. Presentations were very clear and full of practice pointers.” – Nathan Nash, Esq.

“I found the program incredibly informational and helpful. I was also very impressed by the smooth transition from in-person to virtual format. It is always great to hear expert insight from practitioners on both sides of litigation as well as from an experienced Judge.” – Kaitlin Cutshaw, Esq.

“It was really great having a judge’s perspective. The other presenters were very knowledgeable.” – Seth McCormick, Esq.

“Very happy with the practical tips and experience that came out of the seminar.” – Jessica Rimkus, Esq.

“Good, well-rounded introduction to basic civil litigation practice.” – Nemura Pencyla, Esq.

“Extremely well organized, informative, interesting and helpful.” – Nancy Pacher, Esq.

“All the speakers were great!” – Amit Patel, Esq.

“Good substantive content, legal updates, and case law.” – David Swiss, Esq.

“The speakers were informative and animated, keeping me engaged. Many wonderful tips I will carry over into my own practice.” – Shanna N. Crafts, Esq.

“Very experienced speakers with practical real-world examples.” – Lisa Clay, Esq.

“Good explanation of limited attorney-client privilege for client corporations in Illinois. Judge Taylor is a quintessential jurist…[Jack Snyder was] Excellent.” – Thorn McClellan Smith, Esq.

“I recently made the transition from criminal to civil litigation. This was a great refresher course in smoothing that transition.” – Stephanie Pauly, Esq.

“I liked having both plaintiff and defense counsel on the same panel. I like the diversity of the forms represented and appreciated the practical tips.” – Natasha Adler, Esq.

“I have been a practicing lawyer in Indiana for 21 years but am new to Illinois. Very helpful to have the authority, citations, etc.” – Cheryl M. Polarek, Esq.

“I have nothing but positive comments. Good context, well presented, speakers were all prepared. I thought the program was effectively run- especially considering the circumstances. Well-coordinated amongst the speakers.” – Matthew David Duek, Esq.

“I very much liked the opportunity for spontaneous questions and resulting discussion.” – Mel Newman, Esq.

“Very good trial advocacy overview.” – Amanda Wendorff, Esq.

“It covered a lot of beneficial [information]. Speakers’ experiences were very helpful.” – Gabriel Borges, Esq.

“Very detailed [and] covered a wide variety of topics.” – Brad Eben, Esq.

“Great investment to my future in trial practice.” – Kevin Borozan, Esq.

“Panel/Speakers were very pleasant. Significant amount of information packed in sessions. The seminar was enjoyable and informative.” – Greg Sandifer Esq.

“Good info in each section. Thank you.” – Eric Chisholm, Esq.

“Really informative and great to hear a judge’s perspective, especially one from the law division.” – Julie Sieracki, Esq.

“I found it very informative. I’m new to civil law practice and I found it helpful. I found it helpful to me in preparing a civil case.” – Chandra Smith, Esq.

“Motion for summary judgement presentation was excellent.” – Cheryl M. Polarek, Esq.

“Excellent and hugely helpful. Animated but extremely relevant info…” – Mario P. Carlasare, Esq.

“Great aids. Excellent panel – very informative.” – Anthony O’Neill, Esq.

“Gave valuable needed information. Presenters explained topics well and had interesting and helpful feedback.” – Chandra Smith, Esq.

“Good explanation of discovery requirements.” – Amy Rapoport, Esq.

“Very good. Would recommend to others.” – Bruce Theobald, Esq.

“Very practical, helpful, and informative.” – Chandra Smith, Esq.

“Helpful to have the judges’ insight.” – Seth McCormick, Esq.

“It was very thorough.” – Jacqueline Olivares-Heidenreich, Esq.

“Helpful info presented.” – David Mellem, Esq.

“I loved how speaker Dennericka Brooks gave out checklists and concrete logistical advice.” – Caitlin Cervenka, Esq.

“Great job from everyone. I really benefit from the “real-life” examples!” – Delaney Hunt, Esq.

“Great program! Thanks!” – Allyson Cox, Esq.

“Judge Dorothy French Mallen is a great judge with tremendous insight. Her tips to approaching the trial (not pre-trial aka “settlement conference”) were very useful.” – Marc Pawlus, Esq.

“I really appreciated the insight/expertise offered by current practitioners, here in Cook County.” – Javier Rodriguez, Jr., Esq.

“I really enjoyed the training, while a lot is outside my practice area, the procedural information was a great refresher and helped with my confidence.”

“Excellent program! Great tips from each speaker!”

“This program was incredibly informative!”

“All the speakers were knowledgeable and did an excellent good providing a balance of basic information and real-life experiences that provided context to create a deeper understanding of the topics.”

“Very helpful for young attorneys.”

“Good surface-level program with qualified speakers.”

“I really enjoyed the thorough PowerPoints & speaker visuals. I found their explanations engaging and informative.”

“The program was awesome and gave really great practical tips for litigating a case, start to finish.”

“This was great and very helpful!”

“Good program. The content was great.”

“I thought this was a great program. Each speaker had valuable real-life experiences and pointers. I especially thought the judge’s feedback was invaluable. The content provided also had helpful samples.”

“It was an excellent program.”

“The program was a great overview of litigation basics in circuit court.”

“Great session. I especially enjoyed the talk about the different motions, when to use them, and the discussion of depositions. All very great speakers, they were all knowledgeable and personable. They provided practical advice.”

“Very useful to learn best practices in addition to the rules/law. I did not consider the speakers when I was signing up, but they were all great.”

“Great speakers and presentations.”

“Very thorough and good overview of the topics.”

“I really appreciate the extensive knowledge of the speakers and the way their presentations built off of one another.”

“Great program! Very useful.”

“Very satisfied due to content, breadth of coverage, etc.”

“Great! Very inclusive.”

“I thought all of the speakers were great, and I particularly liked Judge Taylor’s commentary.”

“It was engaging and comprehensive!”

“Very helpful.”

“Great presentations and discussions.”

“Program was very beneficial and helpful.”

“Enjoyed hearing the experiential based thoughts.”

“It was very helpful, thank you!”

“Very satisfied. It was helpful to reinforce things I have forgotten since law school. Judge Tailor’s contributions were very good and helpful. Judge Spratt was lovely! I enjoyed her input. Good outline. I enjoyed and appreciated this program because it reviews the basics that you might forget by not dealing with them every day. Further, it helps you build up the basics without wasting the time of your superiors asking these low-level questions. Looking forward to more programs.”

“Judge Tailor was my favorite. He’s practical, kind and set a good tone for what we should aspire to (to comport ourselves as officers of the court). Michael Leonard was terrific. Judson Graham’s session was very informative with some useful, practical tips. Judge Spratt was fantastic. She’s funny, informative, and smart.”

“Good opportunity for new lawyers. Very knowledgeable speakers. Lots of great material on trial. Very informative post-trial session.”

“Presenters were very knowledgeable and offered practical pointers on specific litigation practice.”

“Enjoyed the deposition presentation. Found value in specific, real-world examples.”

“Really quality content and well-informed speakers.”

“As an attorney who has only been practicing for a year, I found this helpful. Topics were very extensive. You did a great job.”

“Very informative. I’ve never conducted a trial myself and I feel much more prepared for having viewed this program.”

“Excellent and knowledgeable panel.”

“I think the program was excellent and the speakers were top-notch.”

“This as a really great program. I got a lot out of it.”

“Excellent and thorough presentations.”

“Great summary of the practice of law. Clear and practical information.”

“The combination of practitioners and a judge was useful. I appreciated the notes on strategy and the culture of the practice, which are hard to access through reading the rules.”

“I really enjoyed the program. It was great to hear from a judge’s perspective.”

“Visual aids/demonstrations were helpful.”

“A well-organized, comprehensive, and practical presentation on the mechanics of IL trial practice. Judge Conlon’s advice was concrete and on point, and she added new information rather than simply endorsing what the presenters were saying–e.g., noting the importance of prepping witnesses on the parameters imposed by in limine rulings. I found her interjections the most helpful of all the judges we heard from over the course of this boot camp.”

“I appreciated the clarity with which the information was presented, and the combination of big picture advice re: framing and strategy with more detailed advice about specific rules and pitfalls. I’m planning to refer back to the presentation materials as a way of orienting myself next time I write a deposition outline or summary judgment brief.”

“I enjoyed the program and appreciate the practical tips. I thought it was very helpful for the presenters to use examples from their own experience.”

“Judge Larson was fantastic and Judge Sheahan was amazing! I enjoyed Brian Eldridge’s anecdotes. They made nebulous concepts more concrete. John Killacky was very knowledgeable.”

“It was very useful. Judge Tailor had a very valuable perspective on how judges view things. The references to the discovery rules, infrequently used rules, and pitfalls were very helpful. Very practical guidance on e-discovery.”

“I enjoyed the speakers. I appreciated the judge’s practice tips.”

“Good program, knowledgeable presenters. Good basics, including pleading requirements and motion practice.”

“The practical advice and concrete examples from each attorney’s practice made today’s session very useful.”

“It was informative and easy to follow. Lots of good information.”

“The example deposition with objections was one of the most helpful and practical examples I have ever seen; Most presenters tell you what to do or not to do without showing you; this was great!”

“Best part of the seminar was the mock deposition conducted by Leonard and White.”

“I really liked the example of the deposition being acted out.”

“Judge Larson’s commentary was informative and insightful.”

“Good, practical tips. Clear and practical information.”

“I appreciate the concrete, practical advice and helpful templates. Clear, digestible breakdowns of trial prep and in limine practice. I appreciated the helpful pretrial checklist breaking down tasks and providing timeframes. Clear presentation on juries. The case law discussions were helpful, as was the orientation to the IPI. Really insightful commentary from Judge Mallen. Helpful to have Judge Hartigan’s perspective.”

“Really great answers on so many practical points from this panel. Both Judge Larson and Judge O’Brien Sheehan gave really excellent advice on briefs (e.g. importance of headers and avoiding overstatement), what not to do on oral argument, and SJ. Eldridge and Killacky were excellent – thorough and practical – and pre-answered a number of questions.”

“Very satisfied.”

“Michael Leonard was very clear and informative and gave excellent supplemental materials. Great judicial perspective. Judge Larson gave good practical guidance. Very nice to hear from a downstate judge. Good perspective and helpful tips from Judge O’Brien Sheahan.”

“I enjoyed Part 2 and feel that I learned a lot. Thank you! Great presentation by Michael Leonard. As a new attorney, the slow pace was great. The examples and mock deposition were a good learning tool.”

“I thought it was a very helpful and practical overview of trial and post-trial proceedings. Megan gave very practical advice on how to structure questions and arguments. I loved Judge Conlon–she was very down to earth and had great comments.”

“These speakers were good, especially the judge! Great intro material.”

“Michael Leonard’s advice was great, and I will use his tip sheet as a resource in the future. I thought the mock deposition was especially helpful. MSJ presentation offered useful information presented clearly and logically. I wasn’t familiar with the mechanics of state court summary judgment practice so this was a great roadmap. It’s helpful to have the model materials in the appendix to refer to.”

“Nice to have a judge’s perspective. Judge Tailor was a good speaker. Megan Thibert-Ind was my favorite speaker…very engaging and great advice.”

“J.T. Wilson was very well-spoken and offered practical tips.”

“Voir dire session is always good. I appreciate hearing tips on this topic.”

“Ian was very thorough and detailed. I liked how broad Clint’s presentation was, going to executing judgments and taking appeals as well as the nuts and bolts of post-trial proceedings.”

“I thought the presenters were very knowledgeable and conveyed general practice tips. Dennericka had a very solid road map and concrete advice on how to prepare for trial. Judge Mallen’s comments were insightful and relevant. I thought JT and Lenny were great.”

“I thought it was good, well laid out and flowed well.”

“Megan gave a great trial practice refresher, presented in a clear and dynamic way.”

“The program was very informative, and I enjoyed all of the speakers.”

“Overall, I found all the topics relevant and logically connected and the presenters knowledgeable and engaging.”

“Excellent in regard to substance and presentation.”

“The program was well-organized and had a good mix of panelists. I appreciated that there were both judges and practitioners.”

“I really enjoyed this year’s program. My favorite speakers were Thaddeus Harrell and Megan Thibert although everyone was great. I also was excited to hear the judges speak and provide insight based on the bench’s perspective.”

“Thank you for ensuring that the virtual experience was on par with the live event in person!”

“Most helpful that state court litigation discussed from intake to appeal.”

“I thought getting the judges’ views were critical. I work in the NDIL and can verify that judge preferences can make or break a case.”

“I enjoyed hearing from the judges and would love to hear more.”

“It was a great refresher on several different topics that I use in my current practice.”

“Judge Conlon was the most helpful to me because she was able to speak to the cases that I am most familiar with. Also, it is always to hear from a judge about their perspective.”

“I really enjoyed how the speakers talked about mistakes they’d seen or done. It made it less dry and easier to follow. I really liked the list of objections.”

“J.T. Wilson had great ideas! Good insight as to questioning of jurors. Vivian Tarver-Varnado gave very good practical advice on getting organized.”

“Very informative, especially practical pointers.”
”Speakers were very knowledgeable and informative.”

“Everything was covered – jury instructions were very helpful.”

“Very good course especially when they gave specific stories and/or examples.”

”The mechanical aspect of litigation improved my knowledge as a new attorney. Understanding the process from beginning to end.”

“The enumerated lessons (i.e. 10 things to do on direct examination for expert witness) were very valuable!” – Valerie Magnuson, Esq.

“Great discussion of direct and cross.”

“Gave a lot of insight on the inner mechanics of the Circuit Court system at trial. A++!”

“Morning speakers were great and worked well together.”

“The course was very comprehensive…the speakers were all knowledgeable and engaging.”

“Morning panel on pre-trial issues was…strong, particularly on discovery and depositions.”

“[Mike Leonard] was my favorite…I enjoyed the afternoon panel.”

“Very satisfied. Wanted an overview and this was what I was looking for.”

“Engaging, thought-provoking relevant information.”

“Great overview of a lot of topics!”

“Great tips on drafting discovery requests.”

“Excellent examples and analogies.”

“Great suggestions! Good to have a judge’s perspective.”

“Very satisfied.”

“It was very informative!”

“Knowledgeable speakers – information solid.”

“Great insights and info.”

Faculty

Hon. Brendan A. O’Brien
Circuit Judge
Circuit Court of Cook County, IL

The Hon. Brendan A. O’Brien is a Circuit Judge for the Illinois Circuit Court of Cook County. He was elected to the bench in 2016. 

Judge O’Brien earned a Bachelor’s degree from Illinois State University. He spent the next several years working as an appropriations and research analyst for Michael Madigan, a member of the Illinois House of Representatives. He completed his J.D. at the University of Illinois at Chicago, John Marshall law school, and was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 1996.

After graduation from law school, Judge O’Brien worked as an attorney at Connelly Schroeder from 1996 and 1999, then moved to Hinshaw & Culbertson where he worked as a Partner until his election. His practice was focused on insurance defense and medical malpractice cases.

---

Hon. John H. Ehrlich
Circuit Court Judge (Tentative pending trial schedule)
Circuit Court of Cook County, IL

 John H. Ehrlich is a judge for the 8th Subcircuit of the Cook County Judicial Circuit Court in Illinois. He assumed office in 2012. His current term ends on December 2, 2024.

John Ehrlich received his undergraduate degree from Northwestern University in 1980 and his J.D. degree from Northwestern University Law School in 1987.[1] He worked as an attorney for 24 years prior to his 2012 judicial election. In 2008, he became Deputy Corporation Counsel for the City of Chicago.

---

Hon. Patricia O’Brien Sheahan
Circuit Court Judge
Circuit Court of Cook County, IL

Judge Sheahan is a Cook County Circuit Court judge, currently assigned to Law Division, Motions Section, Calendar D, in Courtroom 2207 of the Daley Center. She oversees a call of approximately 1,300 Law Division cases, which include medical malpractice, motor vehicle accidents, products liability, defamation/libel, premises liability and other general torts.  She previously covered civil non-jury and jury trial courtrooms and a civil jury motion call, as well as the post-judgment and miscellaneous remedies call in the First Municipal District. Judge Sheahan serves on the Board of Directors of the Illinois Judges Association and serves as a Topic Editor of the Illinois Judicial Benchbook on Civil Law and Procedure.

Prior to her election in 2014, Judge Sheahan served as Associate General Counsel of the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago (RIC), now known as the Shirley Ryan Ability Lab.  In this capacity, she oversaw all litigation and claims, including case investigations, pre-trial discovery and settlement negotiations. Additionally, she handled and defended all employment/labor matters and claims before the EEOC, the NLRB and the IDHR, including fact conferences, mediations and evidentiary hearings. She also represented RIC in a wide variety of other complex disputes ranging from contractual, insurance coverage and probate matters.

Before joining RIC, Judge Sheahan worked as an attorney at Baker McKenzie in its litigation practice group.  She gained extensive federal and state court experience in a wide range of complex civil litigation matters, including medical malpractice, employment, products liability, and class action suits. She also represented clients at the appellate level, including the Illinois Supreme Court and multiple appellate districts throughout the State of Illinois.

---

Heather Renée Adams, Esq.
Shareholder
Roetzel & Andress

Heather is a commonsense, driven, traditional labor and employment attorney who provides practical guidance to employers across a spectrum of commercial and employment litigation matters, including single-plaintiff and multi-party cases, high-stakes whistleblower actions, wage and hour disputes, restrictive covenant litigation, and various other areas of employment law. She has practiced before federal and state and appellate courts. She also has a wealth of experience defending employers before civil rights and fair employment administrative agencies and commissions across the country. Heather has represented clients from diverse industries, including: transportation; federal, state and local government; higher education; healthcare; financial services and global retailers. Heather has given numerous presentations on development with the traditional labor and employment law landscape, litigation strategies, and workplace solutions.

Clients call on Heather to provide general counseling services and leadership with respect to implementing preventative measures and resolving disputes using alternative methods. She also has valuable experience representing employers in union disputes, collective bargaining, labor arbitrations, fact-findings, conciliations, and hearings. Heather is also a highly sought-after investigator and routinely performs internal investigations and Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility assessments. 

---

Paul J. Coogan, Esq.
Partner
Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP

Paul focuses his practice on commercial litigation in both federal and state trial courts, and assists clients in resolving all manner of business disputes. He has extensive experience representing clients in matters involving a wide variety of contract disputes, employment and termination issues, non-competition, non-solicitation, and other restrictive covenants, and breach of fiduciary duty.

Paul is also an experienced appellate attorney, and in his practice as a member of Taft’s Appellate group, Paul represents clients on both sides of the bar in state and federal appellate courts. Paul also counsels clients on trial and post-trial strategy in preparation for appeal, and has experience drafting and responding to post-trial motions and petitions for leave to appeal on behalf of both plaintiffs and defendants.

Prior to joining Taft, Paul gained extensive legal writing and research experience while serving for two years as a law clerk to the Honorable Judge William J. Bauer of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Before his clerkship, Paul practiced at another law firm, focusing on commercial and products liability defense litigation for numerous national and international companies.

---

Brian Eldridge, Esq.
Founding Partner
Hart McLaughlin & Eldridge

Brian Eldridge is a trial lawyer who devotes 100% of his practice to civil litigation. Brian has a wide range of experience successfully litigating multi-million dollar, high-stakes cases on behalf of his clients. He concentrates his practice in products liability, construction/construction defect, transportation, premises liability, commercial litigation, mass torts, and class action matters. He has handled numerous cases involving death and catastrophic injuries, including paralysis, traumatic brain injuries, amputations and other significant permanent disabilities.

Within the commercial litigation context, Brian has successfully litigated cases involving breach of contract and allegations of fraud and bad faith. He has also handled numerous consumer class action lawsuits under federal statutes including the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). In addition, Brian has litigated cases involving alleged environmental exposure to mold, vinyl chloride, and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB).

Brian was selected for inclusion in the Illinois Rising Stars list for eight straight years, from 2008 to 2015. No more than 2.5% of lawyers under the age of 40 in the state of Illinois are selected for this honor. In 2013, Brian was honored to be named to Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’s “40 Illinois Attorneys Under Forty to Watch” list. In 2015 and 2016, Brian was named an Emerging Lawyer by Leading Lawyers. The distinction of being named an Emerging Lawyer is reserved for the top 2% of Illinois lawyers who are 40 years old or younger and have been identified by their peers as proving themselves to be professional, ethical, and experienced at an early point in their legal career. In 2017, Brian was selected as an Illinois Super Lawyer, which is limited to 5% of attorneys in the state.

Brian’s practice philosophy focuses on being accessible and responsive to clients at all times. He is on the rapid response team for several clients and is frequently called upon to orchestrate immediate investigations. Through his years of practice, Brian has developed an extensive expert network, having worked with consultants in various specialized areas including medicine, engineering, construction, epidemiology, pharmacology, economics, federal regulations, safety standards, risk assessment and psychology.

---

Ian H. Fisher, Esq.
Partner
Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP

Ian represents clients ranging from small entrepreneurs to Fortune 100 companies in commercial litigation matters involving real estate, antitrust, trade secret misappropriation, restrictive covenant, consumer, contract, and business tort disputes.

Ian has substantial experience defending against class actions and navigating multidistrict litigation proceedings. He has successfully defended on appeal many of his trial court victories and is skilled at identifying strategies that align with his clients’ business goals. Having served as a general counsel for both a law firm and a small company, Ian has a unique understanding of in-house counsel’s perspective.

Ian counsels clients on a wide range of issues central to their business needs, including Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) compliance, the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), insurance policies and claims, risk mitigation, and restrictive covenants.

Among his many accolades, Illinois Super Lawyers ranks Ian as one of its “Top 100 Attorneys” in Illinois and has included him on its Super Lawyers list for a dozen years. For more than 17 years, the Leading Lawyers Network has named Ian as a “Leading Lawyer” in both Commercial Litigation and Class Action/Mass Tort Defense, and he has been ranked more recently in the area of Trade Secrets/Unfair Competition Law. Best Lawyers recognizes Ian for Commercial Litigation. He is also rated AV Preeminent 5/5 by Martindale-Hubbell, its top rating for ethical standards and legal ability.

---

Kristen E. Hudson, Esq.
Of Counsel
Dickinson Wright PLLC

Kristen Hudson, Of Counsel in Dickinson Wright’s Austin and Chicago offices, represents businesses and business people in complex commercial litigation in state and federal courts in Texas, Illinois and across the country.  Kristen has won high-stakes challenges in a variety of substantive areas, from breach of contract, business and statutory torts, including fraud and the False Claims Act claims, to intellectual property disputes involving the protection of trade secrets and privacy. Kristen has significant experience with Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code and the U.N. Convention on the International Sale of Goods. Kristen also has concentrated experience in lawyer professional liability and fiduciary liability, including high-net worth trust disputes. 

Kristen has served as General Counsel of mid-size law firm with offices in multiple jurisdictions. In addition, she has been seconded to clients for extended periods including at a large energy company and with a UK-based insurance company. With this experience to guide her, Kristen works to avoid court wherever possible for her clients, and pursues solutions that make the most business and financial success for her clients, including advocating aggressively when litigation is required.

In addition to her commercial litigation practice, Kristen is knowledgeable about all types of third-party commercial liability policies, including directors’ and officers’ liability, professional liability, employment practices liability, commercial general liability, products liability, cyber liability, among others. Kristen has experience on all sides of an insurance coverage dispute and business disputes involving the insurance industry.  As a policyholder lawyer, Kristen recovered millions of dollars in insurance proceeds for her policyholder clients.  Most recently, Kristen served as coverage and monitoring counsel on behalf of insurers.

Prior to attending law school, Kristen was a French teacher in the North Carolina public schools.

---

Mona Naser, Esq.
Member & Director of Personnel
Carlson Dash

Mona has worked with corporate and individual clients to advise, counsel, and assist them in areas of commercial litigation, commercial real estate, general corporate work, and residential real estate.

On the litigation side of her practice, Mona represents individuals and entities as well as major creditors in a multitude of litigation matters in the areas of complex commercial cases and employment law.

In her capacity as a legal business counselor, Mona has advised individual and corporate owners of multi-unit dwellings, commercial strip malls, gas stations, mixed-use property, and small businesses in matters of dispositions, acquisitions, leasing, employee policies, and financing.

She works with clients to initially determine the appropriate business formation for their respective business needs and continues the relationship by helping business clients with corporate formalities, shareholder disputes, and dissolution. She drafts Shareholder Agreements, Bylaws, Operating Agreements, Resolutions, Employment Contracts, and other documents necessary for corporate governance.

Mona’s practice goes beyond working with businesses. She also represents buyers and sellers in all matters of dispositions and acquisitions.

---

Edward J. Samuelson, Esq.

Levin & Perconti

Ed Samuelson focuses his practice on all types of personal injury, medical malpractice, and nursing home neglect cases. He joined Levin & Perconti as an associate attorney in 2022.

Prior to joining Levin & Perconti, Samuelson spent nearly 12 years working as a judicial law clerk at the Circuit Court of Cook County for Judges Ronald S. Davis, John P. Kirby, John “Jack” P. Callahan, Jr., and Melissa A. Durkin. His experience included writing orders on motions, prepping judges for hearings, reviewing settlement petitions, and assisting with courtroom proceedings.

Samuelson taught two classes at The John Marshall Law School, now known as the Law School at U.I.C. One class was for judicial externs where he got to know many Northern Illinois state and federal court judges. The other class was called Illinois Civil Motion Practice, which focused on practical aspects of litigating. His students learned the chronology of motions at various stages of litigation, from motions challenging venue and jurisdiction to motions for good faith finding.Prior to working as a judicial law ckerk, Samuelson worked as an associate attorney at another Chicago personal injury law firm. 

Samuelson graduated from The John Marshall Law School cum laude in 2008. He earned many honors including the Dean’s Scholarship, Baim Scholarship, and the Herzog Scholarship for Academic Excellence. He also holds Master of Philosophy and Master of Arts degrees in French Studies with Distinction from New York University (1992 and 1988); a Master of Arts in French with Distinction from The University of Illinois at Chicago (1986), and a Bachelor of Arts in Medieval Studies with a minor in Economics from Northwestern University (1979).

---

Kevin T. Turkcan, Esq.
Law Clerk to the Hon. Rena Marie Van Tine

Kevin T. Turkcan is a law clerk to Justice Rena Marie Van Tine of the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, in Chicago. He has worked for the court since 2020 and was previously a law clerk to the Honorable Eileen O’Neill Burke, the incoming Cook County State’s Attorney. From 2013 to 2020, Kevin was in private practice, primarily representing plaintiffs in police misconduct, whistleblower, and employment discrimination cases, and also practiced criminal defense. He has tried civil and criminal cases in both state and federal court.

Kevin obtained a J.D. from Loyola University Chicago School of Law in 2013 and hisundergraduate degree from the University of Notre Dame in 2009.

---

Kim R. Walberg, Esq.
Partner
Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP

Kim concentrates her practice in commercial litigation, including breach of contract, business torts, shareholder disputes, class action defense, construction litigation, zoning litigation, commercial lease disputes, enforcement of restrictive covenants, trust litigation and Section 1983 civil rights litigation. She is the chair of Taft’s Chicago Litigation group and previously served on the firm’s Executive Committee.

Kim has defended the City of Chicago and the Chicago Police Department in multiple class actions alleging due process violations based on the purported deprivation of money and other personal property. She has achieved successful resolutions of these cases at the district court level, involving issues which have been appealed and affirmed by the United States Supreme Court.

Kim has also represented the Chicago Park District against opponents of the relocation of the Chicago Children’s Museum from Navy Pier to Grant Park. She successfully defended the Park District’s position at both the circuit court and appellate court levels, taking on legal precedent from the 1800’s concerning Chicago’s Lakefront.

Kim is a pioneer in Illinois video gaming litigation, setting the industry precedent in the area of the enforceability of pre-licensure contracts between video terminal operators and establishments. She also represents Chicago’s premier financial institutions in various litigation matters relating to bank practices and owned real estate.

Kim graduated magna cum laude from Loyola University Chicago School of Law, and was a member of Alpha Sigma Nu National Jesuit Honor Society, the Public Interest Law Society and the Women’s Law Society during law school.

Kim received the 2018 International Advisory Experts Award: Commercial Litigation Lawyer of the Year in Illinois. She was named to the Corporate America Legal Elite for 2015 by Corporate America News magazine with the Award for Innovation in Shareholder Dispute Resolution and Best for Business Torts – Illinois. Kim was also named a Rising Star by Illinois Super Lawyers in the category of Business Litigation in 2013 and 2014. She was named the 2011-2012 Professional Woman of the Year by the National Association of Professional Women.

---

Heidi L. Wickstrom, Esq.
Partner
Salvi, Schostok & Pritchard P.C.

Heidi Wickstrom is a partner at Salvi, Schostok & Pritchard in Chicago, Illinois. Prior to joining the firm, Heidi spent her legal career as a trial attorney at the Pillersdorf Law Firm in New York, New York. Heidi concentrates her practice in representing plaintiffs in medical malpractice, birth trauma, catastrophic motor vehicle, and products liability cases. Heidi was a member of a trial team that obtained a million dollar verdict in a birth trauma case against St. Francis Hospital as well as a February 2024 verdict in a birth trauma case against the University of Chicago Medical Center for million, which is the second-highest medical malpractice verdict in Illinois history. Heidi is an active member of the American Association for Justice, serving on the Board of Governors, the Illinois Trial Lawyer’s Association, serving on the Board of Managers, as well as the New York State Trial Lawyers Association and New York Academy of Trial Lawyers. Heidi is a graduate of the University of Michigan and Syracuse University College of Law.

---

Fees

Seminar Materials are included with OnDemand and all recorded package options.

OnDemand Streaming!  On-Demand Streaming allows for a single person to view the seminar unlimited times until one year after the seminar is held.

Recorded Packages!  Recorded Packages allow for a single person to download and view the program recording and are also available via DVD or CD.

Discounted rates are available for 2-4 attorneys at your firm.  Licenses are available for law firms or agencies that would like to distribute the video package or OnDemand Streaming access to more than four attorneys at their firm or agency.

Fees:

OnDemand Streaming:  $429

Recorded Packages via Download or CD/DVDs:

Video Recording – DVD or Download: $429

Audio Only (for in your car, etc.) Recording – CD or Download:  $429

Order both the Video and Audio Only Packages for only $50 more – Download, DVD or CD: $479

$10 shipping and sales tax (in California) are added at checkout to DVD/CD orders.

This program will be recorded live on December 10 & 12, 2024. Because we record our seminars live and they are edited, OnDemand Streaming and Recorded Packages are available approximately two to three weeks after the seminar is held.

Your OnDemand access is good for up to one-year from the time of purchase.  Please be sure to select OnDemand Streaming to the right and check out. OnDemand can be watched from any type of device.

*The Video recording is a video of the webinar (with sound). The Audio Only recording are audio files only and are for those who wish to listen to it without watching a video (such as in the car or while walking).

Note: OnDemand Streaming can be watched from any device. However, all download packages must be downloaded to a computer first, before transferring them to another device due to downloading as zip files containing both the video/audio and a large folder with seminar materials contained in the download package.

CLE Credit

IL General: This program is approved for 6.75 units of General CLE in Illinois through 12/01/2026.
IL Professional Responsibility: This program is approved for 6.75 units of Professional Responsibility CLE in Illinois through 12/01/2026.

CA General: This program is approved for 7.0 general CLE credits in California.

NY General: This course is eligible for approval, under New York’s CLE Approved Jurisdiction policy, for up to 7.0 CLE units. Pincus Professional Education is a CA Accredited Provider, which is a NY approved jurisdiction. See Section 6 of the New York State CLE Board Regulations and Guidelines for further information.

This program is approved for CLE in the states listed above. Upon request, Pincus Pro Ed will provide any information an attorney needs to support their application for CLE approval in other states other than what is listed above. Many attorneys ask for this and are approved in other states.