<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>HUNDLEY LAW GROUP &#187; Dismissal</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hundleylaw.com/tag/dismissal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hundleylaw.com</link>
	<description>Trial and Appellate Litigation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:55:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Some Post-Hudson Clarity – Green v. Northwest Community Hospital</title>
		<link>http://www.hundleylaw.com/2010/05/some-post-hudson-clarity-%e2%80%93-green-v-northwest-community-hospital/</link>
		<comments>http://www.hundleylaw.com/2010/05/some-post-hudson-clarity-%e2%80%93-green-v-northwest-community-hospital/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2010 16:30:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>HLG</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Law Notebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illinois Appellate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1st Dist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dismissal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Non-suit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[re-filing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sup Ct R 341(h)(7)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voluntary Dismissal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hundleylaw.com/?p=220</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Green v. Northwest Community Hospital, No.1-09-2233 (April 28, 2010). In the uncertain post-Hudson landscape of when a plaintiff&#8217;s voluntary dismissal does or does not prevent a re-filing, this First District decision provides some clarity as to dismissal language that will steer clear of the &#8220;claim splitting&#8221; addressed in the Illinois Supreme Court&#8217;s case of Hudson [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://eservices.isba.org/12all/lt/t_go.php?i=3895&amp;e=OTk1MzA4NA==&amp;l=-http--www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/AppellateCourt/2010/1stDistrict/April/1092233.pdf">Green v. Northwest Community Hospital</a>, No.1-09-2233 (April 28, 2010). In the uncertain post-<em>Hudson</em> landscape of when a plaintiff&#8217;s voluntary dismissal does or does not prevent a re-filing, this First District decision provides some clarity as to dismissal language that will steer clear of the &#8220;claim splitting&#8221; addressed in the Illinois Supreme Court&#8217;s case of <em>Hudson v. City of Chicago</em>. That language: &#8220;plaintiff is granted leave to voluntarily dismiss with leave to reinstate as a matter of right.&#8221; Since this language was held to be a clear pronouncement that the voluntary dismissal was an exception to claim-splitting, the refiled counts not finally disposed of in the original action were permitted to proceed. (The plaintiff also re-filed counts for which summary judgment was granted in the original case. Those counts, not surprisingly, were not allowed to survive.) For those of us who write appeals, the case also affirms the pronouncement in Sup. Ct. R. 341(h)(7): that points raised by an appellant for the first time in a reply brief are waived.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.hundleylaw.com/2010/05/some-post-hudson-clarity-%e2%80%93-green-v-northwest-community-hospital/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

