Case law

People v. Caballero

179 Ill. 2d 205 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 4, 1997

Thus, defendant cannot establish that the disparate treatment of himself and Aviles was unreasonable or unwarranted. … Clearly, the result defendant seeks was not "dictated” by existing precedent, where this court rejected his original claim that his jury should have been "life qualified.” Caballero, 102 Ill. 2d at 45-46 .

Zimmerman v. Village of Skokie

183 Ill. 2d 30 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 18, 1998

The majority also remands this cause to the circuit court for a factual determination as to whether section 2 — 202 of the Tort Immunity Act applies. … This statute clearly establishes a negligence standard of care. It is a more specific provision than section 2 — 202 and encompasses the allegations raised in the complaint.

In re Day

50 L.R.A. 519 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1899

Now, the office of a proviso is to qualify or limit the enactment itself, and not to enlarge the enacting clause. … Considering the proviso as such an enactment, it is clearly special legislation,- prohibited by the constitution, and invalid as such.

Punke v. Village of Elliott

364 Ill. 604 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 10, 1936

No particular right, privilege or immunity was granted the petitioner that was not likewise conferred upon other owners in like situation. It is neither a special nor a local law. … The judicial department may not interfere with such classification when made unless it is clearly unreasonable. (Casparis Stone Co. v. Industrial Board. 278 Ill. 77 .)

Gill v. Foster

157 Ill. 2d 304 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 18, 1993

We cannot say that the trial court clearly abused its discretion in this case. In proving damages, the burden is on the plaintiff to establish a reasonable basis for computing damages. … The voluminous medical bills, however, did not establish a reasonable basis for computing damages.

Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad v. Green

289 Ill. 81 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 18, 1919

1899 is entitled “An act concerning the rights, powers and duties of certain corporations therein mentioned, authorizing the sale and transfer of any railroad, or railroad and toll bridge, and other property, franchises, immunities … Unless both the letter and the spirit of the statute relied upon clearly confer the power it cannot be exercised. (Ligare v. City of Chicago, 139 Ill. 46 .)

Johnson v. Halloran

194 Ill. 2d 493 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 1, 2000

Having established defendants' employment status, we must next consider whether and to what extent they are shielded by sovereign immunity. The doctrine of sovereign immunity was abolished by this court in Molitor v. … Such language does not indicate clearly the temporal reach of this Act.

Chicago Union Traction Co. v. City of Chicago

59 L.R.A. 631 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 25, 1902

An exemption or immunity from taxation so vitally affects the exercise of powers essential to the proper conduct of public affairs, and to the support of government, that immunity or exemption from taxation is never sustained … , unless it has been given in language clearly and unmistakably evincing a purpose to grant such immunity or exemption.

Progressive Party v. Flynn

400 Ill. 102 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1948

Appellees also urge that section 4 of article 7 of the Election Code prevents appellant, the Progressive Party, from qualifying as an established political party, because the vote qualifying it as a political party took place … This proviso clearly leaves under article 7 the cases in which the group cast more than five per cent. (2) Section 10-2 provides the term “political party” shall mean “established political party,” when in a State election

Soucy v. People ex rel. McCracken

113 Ill. 109 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1885

The failure to do so was clearly error. But the judgment of reversal need be placed on no technical ground. … The tribunal established by law for that purpose ought to have been suffered to decide that question for themselves in a lawful way.

Dienes v. Holland

78 Ill. 2d 8 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 3, 1979

520, 523 ), and where the intendment of the statute is clear from the language itself a court will not resort to judicial construction by “ ‘reading into a statute exceptions, limitations or conditions which conflict with clearly … This would require a claimant to establish something in addition to what the statute requires in order to qualify for benefits.

In re Chicago Flood Litigation

Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1997

Clearly, the economic loss rule applies to losses incurred without any personal injury or property damage. Moorman, 91 Ill. 2d at 82. … I note also that the burden of establishing entitlement to immunity, as an affirmative defense, is on the City.

Exelon Corp. v. Department of Revenue

234 Ill. 2d 266 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jul 15, 2009

An administrative decision is clearly erroneous when the reviewing court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. … The Merits Before this court, Exelon contends that it qualifies for the section 201(e) tax credit because it falls within the terms of the statute.

Brush v. Fowler

36 Ill. 53 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1864

The action was- for- forcible entry, and the plaintiff, it is admitted, made out a prima facie case, one which entitled him-to recover,.unless the defendant could establish a legal defense by the evidence he proposed to offer … As to the verdict for one'cent damages, though damages cannot be allowed in such action, we will not reverse the judgment for that cause, the merits being so clearly with the appellee. The judgment must be affirmed.

Northwestern Fertilizing Co. v. Village of Hyde Park

70 Ill. 634 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1873

into an agricultural fertilizer, to be established at a designated point about fifteen miles south of the city. … It contains no language which purports to grant such an immunity.

Molitor v. Kaneland Community Unit District No. 302

18 Ill. 2d 11 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1959

Justice Davis, dissenting: I dissent from the decision of the court which, in one fell swoop, severs from the body of our Illinois law the ancient and established doctrine of governmental immunity from tort liability. … The rule of immunity of the people collectively charged with a governmental function was well established by 1607, the fouth year of James I. (Russell v. Men of Devon, 2 Term Rep. 671, 100 Eng. Rep. 359.)

The PEOPLE v. Hobbs

35 Ill. 2d 263 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 23, 1966

The most that can be said is that the two versions constitute a conflict in the evidence, which fact does not of itself establish a reasonable doubt. (People v. Kelly, 8 Ill.2d 604 .) … And such disagreement on successive trials could result in practical immunity from murder.

Kocsis v. Chicago Park District

362 Ill. 24 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 21, 1935

Justice Wilson delivered the opinion of the court: The plaintiff, Joseph Kocsis, a qualified tax-payer of the former West Pullman Park District, filed a complaint in the circuit court of Cook county against the Chicago Park … The fourth contention is that the Assumption act is a special act granting irrevocable privileges and immunities.

Sullivan v. Edward Hospital

209 Ill. 2d 100 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 5, 2004

Clearly, Gill and Jones do not stand for the proposition that this court has disregarded, or should disregard, the licensing requirement first established in Dolan. … App. 2d 314, 319-20 , 333 P.2d 29, 33 (1958) (reasoning that “surely, a qualified doctor would know what was standard procedure for nurses to follow”).

The PEOPLE v. Haskell

41 Ill. 2d 25 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 24, 1968

Accordingly, the consent by a defendant’s wife to a search of an apartment jointly owned or occupied by them has been held sufficient to waive her husband’s constitutional immunity. (People v. … It follows that we are bound to accept the testimony given by the police detectives as true because it cannot be said that it is clearly unreasonable.