Case law

People v. P.S.

169 Ill. 2d 260 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1996

The elements involved in the forfeiture of the cash in Turner’s case are clearly distinguishable from the elements the State must prove to convict Turner of the offenses charged. … None of the elements necessary to establish forfeiture of the cash are included in the elements needed to establish the three offenses Turner was charged with committing.

People v. Hartfield

460 Ill. Dec. 870 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 21, 2022

It is well established that the giving of contradictory instructions on an essential element in the case is prejudicial error, and is not cured by the fact that another instruction is correct. … We hold that the offense of aggravated discharge of a firearm does not clearly define the unit of prosecution.

People v. Whitehead

169 Ill. 2d 355 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1996

Obviously, a claim may survive the bar of waiver on the basis of any one of these three well-established exceptions. … The record reflects that the jury was qualified during voir dire with questioning concerning these guarantees.

People v. Blair

215 Ill. 2d 427 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 3, 2005

The language of section 122 — 2.1(a)(2) does not limit or qualify the type of conclusion of law and therefore does not disable a judge from considering res judicata and forfeiture. … The appellate court stated that “a review of defendant’s contentions established that they are either unsupported by the record or based on matters that are outside the record.”

Moline School District v. Quinn

54 N.E.3d 825 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 16, 2016

A party claiming that a statute is unconstitutional bears the burden of establishing the statute’s constitutional infirmity. … A party challenging a statute bears a heavy burden of clearly establishing a constitutional violation, and this court owes a duty to uphold legislation when reasonably possible to do so.

American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Village of Arlington Heights

156 Ill. 2d 399 · Illinois Supreme Court · Aug 26, 1993

Clearly, saving a private, profit-motivated company money and time does not serve any public purpose. … City of Chicago (7th Cir. 1992), 958 F.2d 1388, 1400 ), but omits the fact that the same opinion is qualified by the admission that “State courts are not bound by federal courts’ interpretations of State law.”

People v. Scott

148 Ill. 2d 479 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 16, 1992

Even though defendant’s experts qualified their opinions on this matter, we find this testimony persuasive that defendant was not insane. … This evidence was not used to establish defendant’s eligibility for the death penalty.

Parks v. Kownacki

Illinois Supreme Court · Aug 10, 2000

Plaintiff clearly has not pleaded the elements of equitable estoppel. She does not allege that any defendant misrepresented or concealed any material fact. … If the only cognizable legal principles were the ones already acknowledged by the courts in this state, we could not have abrogated sovereign immunity as to school districts (see Molitor v.

The People v. Wilson

342 Ill. 358 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 18, 1930

The mental and physical condition of defendant was established largely by his own testimony. The physician in Chicago who attended him in December, 1929, did not testify. The letter was the basis of the trouble. … The court refused at that time to pass upon the admissibility of the evidence but confined the opening statement to facts clearly admissible.

Hobbs v. Hartford Insurance Co.

Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 21, 2005

In the absence of other qualifying language in the antistacking clause, “[t]here would be little to suggest in such a listing that the parties intended that coverage was to be limited to that provided for only one of the … FOOTNOTES 1: 1 Our discussion of Bruder and Yates should not be construed as establishing a per se rule that an insurance policy will be deemed ambiguous as to the limits of liability any time the limits are noted more than

Cothron v. White Castle System, Inc.

466 Ill. Dec. 85 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 17, 2023

Our appellate court has reached the same conclusion, determining that “the plain language of [section 15(b)] establishes that it applies to each and every capture and use of plaintiff’s fingerprint or … We have found, however, that the statutory language clearly supports plaintiff’s position.

Wade v. City of North Chicago Police Pension Board

Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 1, 2007

“An administrative agency decision is against the manifest weight of the evidence only if the opposite conclusion is clearly evident.” Abrahamson v. … Department of Revenue, 168 Ill. 2d 247, 254 (1995)), and a mixed question of law and fact is reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard (Marconi, 225 Ill. 2d at 532).

Gage v. Cameron

212 Ill. 146 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1904

The word “other” nowhere appears as qualifying the general clause after-the setting forth of the specific words. … introduced for the purpose of showing what constituted the consideration of the deed, and that, as the amount of the encumbrance it assumed, was included iti, and formed a part of, the consideration, the oral evidence was clearly

In re Commitment of Simons

Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 16, 2004

The decision as to whether an expert scientific witness is qualified to testify in a subject area, and whether the proffered testimony is relevant in a particular case, remains in the sound discretion of the trial court. … FOOTNOTES 1: 1 Similarly thorough analyses can be found in the following decisions, all of which rely upon some combination of expert testimony, academic literature, and the nationwide jurisprudential consensus that clearly

People v. Hope

137 Ill. 2d 430 · Illinois Supreme Court · May 30, 1990

Despite the State’s apparent confusion over whether Buckley or his brother was a drug counselor, either fact would clearly be a legitimate, specific, race-neutral reason for challenging him. … Defendant submits that “life qualifying” the venire members in such manner would have enabled him to identify prospective jurors who would refuse to follow the law as well as allowing him to use his peremptory challenges

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 , 288 Ill.Dec. 166 , 817 N.E.2d 524 , quoting People v. … We find that Hernandez's testimony qualifies as newly discovered evidence.

Swift v. Castle

23 Ill. 209 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1859

Is not the purpose for which the conveyance is made, clearly expressed ? … It is a truism, if a man is qualified to dispose of his property absolutely, he is qualified to dispose of it conditionally.

Walker v. People ex rel. Madigan

2015 IL 117138 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 24, 2015

To overcome this presumption, the party challenging the statute must clearly establish the statute’s invalidity. Id. … Simply because a defendant prevailed did not mean the defendant was immune from paying a portion of the master’s fees.

Bayer v. Panduit Corp.

63 N.E.3d 890 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 22, 2016

that credit for future medical payments does not likewise qualify as “reimbursement” and therefore trigger the same obligation to pay the statutory attorney fees … That statute provides that in the “establishment or approval of attorney’s fees” by the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission and owed by an employee or an employee’s dependents for services provided in

People v. McCallister

Illinois Supreme Court · Jul 6, 2000

BACKGROUND The following facts were established at trial. … You don’t feel you’re well qualified in that area or that there would have to be further testing done? A. I’m stating that he’s fit on the medication he is on.