As the use of technology in the courtroom evolves, Illinois has implemented changes to allow remote testimony in civil cases. This shift, under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 241, provides new opportunities for litigants, especially those facing hardships that prevent in-person appearances. However, the expansion of remote testimony also brings new challenges for litigators defending clients in such cases.
In the Third Quarter 2025 issue of Illinois Defense Counsel (IDC) Quarterly, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partner Jonathan Federman explores the implications of this change, focusing on how courts are balancing fairness and due process when considering remote testimony requests. Federman highlights the recent Illinois Appellate Court decision in Spencer v. Ray, where the court reversed a trial court’s denial of remote testimony for a disabled plaintiff unable to attend a key evidentiary hearing. The appellate court ruled that remote testimony was necessary to ensure the plaintiff’s due process rights were protected.
Federman is a Partner in the Chicago office of GRSM and a member of the Insurance, Commercial Litigation, and Appellate practices. His practice includes representation of insurance company clients in disputes arising out of commercial general liability, professional liability, business auto, directors and officers, and other types of insurance policies. Federman provides opinions and recommendations to insurer clients faced with a potential claim, as well as representation in declaratory judgment litigation.
Read the full article in IDC Quarterly.