Heyl Royster



Attorneys Author Articles in Latest Edition of IDC Quarterly


The Illinois Defense Counsel, formerly the Illinois Association of Defense Trial Counsel, has published the Third Quarter 2020 issue of the IDC Quarterly, featuring two columns authored by Heyl Royster attorneys, and the Monograph co-authored by Chris Larson.

Roger Clayton, Mark Hansen, and Emily Perkins co-authored the Health Law column – “Insurer Compelled to Comply with HIPAA Privacy Rule Requirements.” In Haage v. Zavala, the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, considered whether an insurance company was a “covered entity” under HIPAA. The court held that a “non-covered entity” (the insurance company) that received protected health information from an entity covered under a HIPAA qualified protective order must comply with the same restrictions as the covered entity.

John Heil wrote the Civil Rights Update – "Supreme Court Confirms Dismissal for Failure to State a Claim Without Prejudice is a 'Strike' Under the PLRA’s Three-Strikes Rule." This United States Supreme Court case, Lomax v. Ortiz-Marquez, clarifies the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes rule, Section 1915(g). The three-strikes rule bars a prisoner plaintiff from bringing suit in forma pauperis if the prisoner previously filed three or more suits that had been dismissed on the grounds that they were frivolous, malicious, or failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The Supreme Court found that a dismissal of a suit for failure to state a claim, whether with or without prejudice, counted as a strike, furthering the objective of the PLRA to reduce frivolous and malicious lawsuits.

Chris Larson is co-author of this issue’s IDC Monograph – “An Update on Recent Illinois Toxic Tort Litigation and Legislation,” as part of the newly launched (2019) Toxic Tort Law Committee. Chris focused on the recent toxic tort trial and appellate court results in Krumwiede v. Tremco, Inc. that resulted in a win for the defense. The deceased plaintiff developed mesothelioma from alleged exposure to the defendant’s products. The trial court awarded the plaintiff damages totaling $5,063,324.52 (later reduced light of other settlements), and denied all subsequent motions from the defendant. The Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District, determined that more than a minimal asbestos exposure from a defendant’s product is required to fulfill the plaintiff’s burden of proving substantial causation, and ruled Tremco to be entitled to a judgment n.o.v.