noting that a statement regarding the plaintiffs “abusive behavior [and] bizarre management style ... clearly are not actionable opinions”
How later courts described this case
- noting that a statement regarding the plaintiffs “abusive behavior [and] bizarre management style ... clearly are not actionable opinions”
- no reason to forego the application of the forfeiture rule when "the defendant [had] the opportunity to ferret out any 18 1-08-3459 bias among the remaining potential jurors through voir dire questioning to ensure his right to a fair trial"
- no reason to forego the application of the forfeiture rule when “the defendant [had] the opportunity to ferret out any bias among the remaining potential jurors through voir dire questioning to ensure his right to a fair trial”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
JUSTICE WOLFSON, specially concurring:
I agree with Justice Garcia’s careful analysis of the case law and with his “observations” of the trial court’s voir dire procedure. The civics lesson conducted by the trial judge in the presence of prospective jurors should not have happened.
The question then becomes whether the trial judge’s conduct was in error. We cannot conduct a plain error analysis until we find there was an error. See People v. Sims, 192 Ill. 2d 592, 621 (2000). Because I am unable to conclude an error was committed, I concur in the result reached by Justice Garcia.