Can the Court Include Language Used In a Particular Case to Define a Legal Disability ?
In Bloom v. Braun, 317 Ill. App. 3d 720, 730-31, 739 N.E.2d 925, 250 Ill. Dec. 928 (2000), the court dealt with defining a legal disability.
The Court acknowledged that the language of the special interrogatory was potentially confusing in that it could be interpreted as an inquiry of Jeremy's overall cognitive abilities as an infant, i.e., in the "29 months after his birth," but the record indicates that the trial court offered further instruction to the jurors during their deliberations after receiving a question from them.
This information clarified that the interrogatory only asked whether Jeremy's condition existed, and if it did, did it exist during the 29 months following his birth.
The trial court included the Bloom-approved 'language at least twice more after giving the original instruction regarding the definition of a legal disability.