Case law

Amos v. American Trust & Savings Bank

221 Ill. 100 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1906

We think the evidence clearly establishes that John E. Amos, Jr., and Rosalie G. Amos had notice of the mental incapacity of Joseph J. Miller at the time he executed said note and trust deed. … Miller when he left the State Bank of Chicago, and the record does not establish that the taxes and insurance for which John E.

Barclay v. Barclay

184 Ill. 471 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 21, 1900

It is finally urged, with much earnestness, that the facts shown upon the hearing did not justify the order of the court, but that the defendant sufficiently established his inability to perform the decree to entitle him … On the contrary, his own affidavit clearly shows that he has persistently and repeatedly refused to make payments in performance of the decree when he had the ability to do so, choosing to spend large sums of money in resisting

In re Arthur H., Jr.

Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 28, 2004

Gloria testified that she spoke to Lorraine about Earl’s apnea monitor and whether his immunizations were current. … A finding is against the manifest weight of the evidence only if the opposite conclusion is clearly evident. In re Edward T. , 343 Ill. App. 3d 778, 794 (2003).

People ex rel. Burgess v. Wilson

15 Ill. 388 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1854

Clearly in none, in the sense of the constitution. … By what rule of construction am I authorized to add the words, “ or that may be hereafter established in this State.”

Boshuizen v. Thompson & Taylor Co.

360 Ill. 160 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1935

The rule deducible from the authorities is, that even though a stat-. ute may be venerable, its old age does not render it immune against constitutional attacks. … meaning through common law or established precedents.

Ritchie v. People

29 L.R.A. 79 · Illinois Supreme Court · Mar 14, 1895

What are the subjects of its exercise is clearly a judicial question.” The reasoning of the opinion in the Massachusetts case cited does not seem to us to be sound. … Where there is doubt as to whether the subject is clearly expressed in the title, the doubt should be resolved in favor of the validity of the Act.

People Ex Rel. Carlstrom v. Shurtleff

355 Ill. 210 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1933

It is now generally conceded that in order to render immune from attack a judgment discharging a prisoner on habeas corpus the court must have had not only jurisdiction of the subject matter and of the person of the defendant … When the want of jurisdiction clearly appeared during the progress of the trial, it was the right and duty of the court, under the pleadings, to have dismissed the bill.”

Cronk v. People

131 Ill. 56 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 6, 1889

But it is contended on behalf of plaintiff in error, first, that the evidence fails to establish, with sufficient certainty, that Cronk was sworn to testify as a witness in the case; second, that the "trial before the justice … Unless-we are clearly satisfied that the verdict is, under the evidence-submitted to the jury, wrong, it must stand. We can not say here that we are thus satisfied.

River Park, Inc. v. City of Highland Park

Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1998

Act (745 ILCS 10/8–101 (West 1994)); (3) defendant is immune from liability pursuant to section 2–104 of the Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 5/2–104 (West 1996), which provides local governmental entities with immunity from … Moreover, the district court observed that, even if plaintiffs had established a property interest, they would be unable to establish a due process violation because “allegations of arbitrary and irrational application of

People ex rel. Henderson v. Onahan

170 Ill. 449 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1897

It is, of course, true, that the construction of this section might be affected by other provisions of the constitution where statutes are enacted under them, such as section 20 of article 6, providing for the establishment … Unless, therefore, it clearly appears that the act in question is a local or special law in the sense those terms are used in the constitution, it is not in conflict with said section 22.

The PEOPLE v. Nelson

40 Ill. 2d 146 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 21, 1968

The defendant’s argument flies in the face of the record which clearly shows that the defendant was identified as the purchaser independently of and uninfluenced by any viewing at the attempted lineup. … It is plain that the identification of the defendant could be said to have been established apart from and independent of the attempted lineup.

Gadlin v. Auditor of Public Accounts

414 Ill. 89 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1953

On the other hand, we have said that it is a question for legislative determination whether an evil exists and what means should be adopted to prevent it, and its acts will not be interfered with -unless they are clearly … plaintiff that section 4.1, in so far as it protects existing currency exchanges against new entrants into the community, violates the constitutional prohibition against laws which grant any special or exclusive privilege, immunity

Sanitary District of Chicago v. Hanberg

226 Ill. 480 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 18, 1907

It is also the rule that statutes exempting property from taxation are to be construed strictly, and that property claimed to be exempt must clearly appear to be within the terms of the statute. … The exemption does not extend to all property of the municipal corporation, but it is a qualified exemption of such portions of the property as are used exclusively for public purposes.

City of Belvidere v. Illinois State Labor Relations Board

181 Ill. 2d 191 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1998

Central City makes clear that this question is one that the administrative agency “is uniquely qualified to answer.” Central City, 149 Ill. 2d at 523 . … Purporting to employ a “clearly erroneous” standard, what the majority does instead is simply substitute its own judgment for that of the Board.

Dynak v. Board of Education of Wood Dale School District 7

2020 IL 125062 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 7, 2021

The lead opinion has also adequately set forth our long-established principles of statutory construction. To a large extent, I agree with the lead opinion. … Clearly, the legislature could not have intended this.

Stevens v. Illinois Central Railroad

306 Ill. 370 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 19, 1922

unless such extension or inclusion is clearly required by the intent and meaning of the context or disclosed by an examination of the entire act. … Applying these well established rules to the facts in this case, it is apparent that plaintiff failed to establish the preliminary requirements necessary to make the X-ray film admissible.

Rice v. Marathon Petroleum Corp.

2024 IL 129628 · Illinois Supreme Court · May 23, 2024

an Underground Storage Tank Fund intended to be a State fund by which persons who qualify for access to the Underground Storage Tank Fund may satisfy the financial responsibility requirements … If the legislature had intended to create an express private right of action, it clearly knows how to do so.

People v. Shum

117 Ill. 2d 317 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 2, 1987

That conviction alone establishes his eligibility for the death sentence. … The facts in these cases clearly distinguish them from the action before us. In Douglas v.

Defrees v. Brydon

275 Ill. 530 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1916

To construe them otherwise would require not only that we ignore the clearly expressed intention of the testator as disclosed by this latter clause, but also that we wholly disregard the well established rules of law above … of the testator to limit or qualify the estate devised.

Bartholome v. Phillips

311 Ill. 600 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1924

In a qualified sense that is correct, but, especially in a will contest, the bare statement of the rule without any qualification is misleading. … All the law governing the issue tried could be stated much more clearly in a few instructions than in a large number.