Obscure rule to defeat CA lawsuits/arbitration in IL

[Methuss]

Supreme Court Rule 222 went into effect ten years ago. It applies to all cases subject to mandatory arbitration (except small claims cases) and all cases where money damages of $50,000 or less are sought. But it does not apply to small claims cases, evictions, family law cases or actions seeking equitable relief. The rule requires both parties to provide a list of case-related information to the opposing party, such as names and addresses of witnesses, factual basis of the claim, the legal theory of each claim or defense, etc., automatically, without request. The disclosures must be made within 120 days of the filing of the responsive pleading to the Complaint.

The Rule has a “gotchya” provision, Rule 222(g), which states that “the court shall exclude at trial any evidence offered by a party that was not timely disclosed as required by this rule, except by leave of court for good cause shown. If a defendant moves, on the day of trial, to exclude all evidence given the plaintiff’s failure to file a Rule 222 disclosure statement, a court is likely to grant the request, dooming the plaintiff’s action.

[skybluepink]

I've done some research on websites and found out that in 2002 Gray Davis made a special provision regarding mandatory binding arbitration but for the life of me I could find out what it is. It's such a cliff hanger!

Have you heard anything?

EDIT: Good lord, I think I found it. There was a thread a while back that touched on it.

http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/showthread.php?t=227015&page=4&highlight=binding+arbitration

Of course, I'm going to call Monday just to make sure!