Case law

Carney v. Union Pacific R.R. Co.

77 N.E.3d 1 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 20, 2016

Such conduct is insufficient, as a matter of law, to establish a duty under section 414 of the Restatement. … Based on this distinction, plaintiff argues that he qualifies as a “third person” for purposes of section 411. We disagree.

Ward v. Decatur Memorial Hospital

2019 IL 123937 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 19, 2021

§ 2-622(a)(1) (requiring review of the cause of action by a qualified health professional)), the health care professional did not identify his reasons for determining that a meritorious cause of action … The dismissal orders neither terminated the litigation nor firmly established the parties’ rights.

Belfield v. Coop

8 Ill. 2d 293 · Illinois Supreme Court · Mar 22, 1956

To hold otherwise would abrogate the long established rule in this State and align this court against the great weight of authority elsewhere. … Stat. 1953, chap. 3, par. 221,) clearly contemplates that testimony may be given in the county court to prove fraud, forgery, compulsion, or other improper conduct.

People v. Lawton

Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 7, 2004

Lahmeyer, “if you get into a diagnosis like NOS [not otherwise specified], approximately 50 percent of the people in this room would qualify for that; so that has the lowest validity and almost no clinical usefulness.” … Ct. 2086, 2090 (1976) (“The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment does not establish any right to an appeal [citation] and certainly does not establish any right to collaterally attack a final judgment of conviction”)

People v. Gacho

122 Ill. 2d 221 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1988

It is established that a trial court’s ruling on a motion to suppress will not be disturbed unless it is manifestly erroneous. (People v. Garcia (1983), 97 Ill. 2d 58, 74 , cert. denied (1984), 467 U.S. 1260 , 82 L. … The trial court held the statement was admissible, qualifying as a spontaneous-declaration exception to the hearsay rule.

Harmon v. Martin

395 Ill. 595 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1947

The price agreed upon by the parties at which Martin took over these assets was $6200 for the contracts, and $6800 for the lots, which, according to the undisputed testimony of two disinterested, qualified real-estate men … The preponderance of the evidence in the record clearly establishes the following facts: That the terms of the agreement entered into by the original joint adventurers in 1919 provided that a majority of the group should

The PEOPLE v. Francis

40 Ill. 2d 204 · Illinois Supreme Court · Aug 15, 1968

Section 3 — 4 establishes procedures for the hearing. … Obviously, it costs more to operate a school with a comprehensive curriculum than one offering the minimum to qualify as a Class II district.

Miller v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

173 Ill. 2d 252 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1996

By its terms, subdivision (c)(2)(i) contains no qualifying criteria regarding plaintiff’s choice of an alternate forum. See McClain, 121 Ill. 2d at 292 . … In interpreting an enactment, it is well established that the use of the word "and” in the conjunctive is appropriate and will be given effect unless such use would produce a result not intended. See People ex rel.

People v. Strickland

154 Ill. 2d 489 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 4, 1992

The defendant must also establish that he was prejudiced as a result of counsel’s deficient performance. … At that time, the trial judge granted a defense motion to prohibit death qualifying prospective jurors prior to trial. The next discussion occurred at a pretrial hearing on January 4, 1988.

Johnson v. Edgar

Illinois Supreme Court · May 22, 1997

The exemption established by Public Act 89--452, however, was more limited than that contained in Public Act 89--428 and contained far more details concerning its application. … In enacting Public Act 89-- 428, the legislature clearly crossed that line. No matter how liberally the single subject rule is construed, Public Act 89--428 violates that rule.

People v. Johnson Modified Upon Denial of Rehearing - replaces opinion filed 10/17/03

Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 26, 2004

Thus, the breadth of the court’s ruling was not clearly established. It does not appear that the court balanced the prejudicial impact of such evidence against its probative value. … Defense counsel’s argument clearly invited appropriate State comments on many levels.

People v. Enis

139 Ill. 2d 264 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1990

The questions to defendant at most tenuously established motive or that he was lying, but more clearly they called for speculation and allowed into evidence the details of the rape. See also J.L. Simmons Co. v. … These facts also may have established that defendant was lying.

Southern Illinoisian v. Illinois Department of Health

Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 2, 2006

Based upon her credentials, the circuit court qualified Dr. Sweeney as an expert witness on the subject of data anonymity. Dr. … As we have noted, it was the Department=s burden under the FOIA to establish that its refusal to release the requested material to plaintiff fell within the exemption set forth in section 7(1)(a) of the FOIA, by establishing

FOREST PRESERVE DIST. v. First Nat. Bank

356 Ill. Dec. 386 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 1, 2011

But as we have noted, Dunlevy clearly held that the filing of a condemnation complaint is not a taking. … But the Idaho statutory scheme at issue in Brown is clearly distinguishable from section 7-121 of our act.

People v. Phillips

217 Ill. 2d 270 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 1, 2005

The appellate court has, in effect, adopted the defendant’s position in Campbell, a construction we clearly rejected when we “decline[d] to read McClanahan so broadly.” Campbell, 208 Ill. 2d at 212 . … Other than the limitations noted, where the stipulation is tantamount to a guilty plea, we did not qualify the foregoing principle in Campbell, and we see no need to do so now.

In re James E.

Illinois Supreme Court · May 22, 2003

The second petition was accompanied by a certificate from a qualified mental health examiner, as required by section 3–602 of the Code (405 ILCS 5/3–602 (West 2000)), in which the examiner indicated that he had examined respondent … In some cases, where the patient is completely noncommunicative or has suffered a physical disability, the deterioration of the patient’s condition clearly prevents making a written request for discharge.

People ex rel. Madigan v. Burge

2014 IL 115635 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 24, 2014

Accordingly, there is no justification for us to depart from well-established rules of statutory interpretation. ¶ 35 The Attorney General’s complaint faces an additional problem. … The majority’s decision is much broader than that—the majority decides that benefit decisions by the Board are immune to challenge by the Attorney General.

People v. Hanna

207 Ill. 2d 486 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 17, 2003

The principles that lead to this conclusion are well established. Administrative regulations have the force and effect of law and are construed according to the same standards that govern the construction of statutes. … When that real-world context is taken into account, the appellate court’s construction of section 510.40(c) is clearly untenable and must be rejected.

Arangold Corp. v. Zehnder

187 Ill. 2d 341 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1999

The party challenging the constitutionality of a statute bears the burden of rebutting this presumption and clearly establishing a constitutional violation. … This court's precedent clearly establishes that the proper test for determining a single subject violation is whether the matters included within the enactment have a natural and logical connection to a single subject.

People v. Ortiz

235 Ill. 2d 319 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 19, 2009

“Manifest error” is defined as “error which is ‘ “clearly evident, plain, and indisputable.” ’ ” Morgan, 212 Ill. 2d at 155 , quoting People v. Johnson, 206 Ill. 2d 348, 357-60 (2002), quoting People v. … We find that Hernandez’s testimony qualifies as newly discovered evidence.