Case law

People v. Beller

74 Ill. 2d 514 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1979

Walker, originally a co-defendant in the trial, testified for the State under a statutory grant of immunity (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 38, par. 106—1 et seq.). … This case does not fall within that exception, however, because the purpose of the prosecutor’s remarks here was clearly to impeach defendant’s testimony that he bought the stolen goods from Walker, and not to impeach testimony

People v. Hope

116 Ill. 2d 265 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 21, 1986

The State did not use this evidence as a qualifying factor to support the defendant’s eligibility for the death penalty since he already qualified for another reason, but instead used it in the aggravation stage of the sentencing … Thus, the State further alleges that the defendant’s citation of Davis is “clearly inapposite” to this case.

People v. Valdez

67 N.E.3d 233 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 22, 2016

This advice was clearly incorrect, according to the Supreme Court. In fact, Padilla’s drug conviction subjected him to mandatory deportation from the country. … Neither the Immigration and Nationality Act 1 The appellate court held defendant’s conviction did not qualify as an aggravated felony under the federal immigration statutes because defendant

Ickes v. Ickes

386 Ill. 19 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1944

It is the settled policy of this court to adopt the construction of a will that will give an estate of inheritance to the first devisee unless other limiting or qualifying clauses in the will clearly and unequivocally disclose … that it was the intention of the testator to limit or qualify the estate granted.

Decatur Park District v. Becker

368 Ill. 442 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1938

The powers of the district as set forth in the foregoing act show clearly that the establishment of playgrounds is a park purpose. … It was clearly not the result of mistake or of passion and prejudice. Public Service Co. v. Deatherbee, 311 Ill. 505 ; City of Chicago v. Chicago Title and Trust Co. 331 id. 322.

Anderson v. Wagner

79 Ill. 2d 295 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 2, 1979

Though these cases were phrased in special-legislation language, they clearly applied an equal protection standard. … In the cases now before us there clearly is a sound and rational basis for the classification at issue.

Parks v. Libby-Owens-Ford Glass Co.

360 Ill. 130 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1935

The word “poisonous” clearly modifies and restricts the meaning not only of the word “chemicals” but also the words “minerals” and “other substances.” … The General Assembly has failed to establish a standard or rule of action. The section is therefore void.

People v. Scharlau

141 Ill. 2d 180 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1990

We only object to defendants’ methods and the ultimate personal reward they gleaned from the establishment of that transition government. … This clearly is not the case for defendants. We also find that the appellate court’s use of a “mixed-interest” interpretation violates the legislative intent of these enactments.

Commerce Commission ex rel. City of Bloomington v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.

309 Ill. 165 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1923

There is no reason why the members of this commission should not develop and establish a system of rules and precedents as wise and beneficial within their sphere of action as those established by the early common law judges … Where the facts are controverted and the decision depends upon credit to be given contradictory testimony the courts will give great weight to the finding of the commission, which is qualified by experience and special study

Landfill, Inc. v. Pollution Control Board

74 Ill. 2d 541 · Illinois Supreme Court · Mar 22, 1979

The Board’s contention, advanced for the first time on oral argument, that the action against the Board was barred by sovereign immunity, is also without merit. … Such an action does not contravene principles of sovereign immunity. See Bio-Medical Laboratories, Inc. v. Trainor (1977), 68 Ill. 2d 540, 548 ; see also Moline Tool Co. v.

In re Estate of Cashman

134 Ill. 88 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 12, 1890

The will was admitted to probate on the 8th day of March, 1880, and the executrix and executor named, qualified as such, and entered upon the discharge of their duties. … The use of the word “unexpended” clearly implied the power to expend.

Hunter Packing Co. v. Industrial Commission

1 Ill. 2d 99 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 24, 1953

The established rule is that it is the province of the Industrial Commission, qualified by experience and special study, to draw reasonable conclusions and inferences from evidentiary facts in workmen’s compensation proceedings … , and the courts are not privileged to substitute their judgment for factual findings of the commission unless they are clearly and manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence.

George D. Hardin, Inc. v. Village of Mount Prospect

99 Ill. 2d 96 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 1, 1983

Clearly, we believe, a major purpose of the General Assembly in enacting the legislation would be frustrated. … The legislation before us is clearly distinguishable from that upheld in Faitoute.

Healy v. People

177 Ill. 306 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1898

In many jurisdictions the rule has been established that in criminal cases a strict accordance with the statute and its provisions is required, and that the mode and manner of drawing the array of jurors prescribed by the … undeniable the precise evils which the Jury Commissioners act was designed to remedy may be legally inflicted upon him, notwithstanding the legislative enactment framed for the especial purpose of securing to the citizen immunity

Department of Public Works & Buildings v. Finks

10 Ill. 2d 15 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 26, 1956

•It is not claimed these witnesses were not qualified to give an opinion on value. … Here, the jury verdict ($4200) did approximate the lowest estimate ($3600), but this is not, of itself, sufficient to establish a clear and palpable mistake." (Forest Preserve District v. Dearlove, 337 Ill. 555 .)

MacMurray College v. Wright

38 Ill. 2d 272 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 29, 1967

Justice Ward delivered the opinion of the court: We have consolidated two appeals, both presenting the question whether certain properties used as housing for members of the faculties and staffs of the appellee colleges . qualify … The appellant Nordlund contends that the 1959 amendment is unconstitutional because through it the legislature sought to expand the boundaries of exemption established by the constitution.

Sugrue v. Crilley

329 Ill. 458 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 24, 1928

Zachmann, 201 Ill. 380 ,) which evidence must be of such quality and quantity as to establish the charge clearly and conclusively. (Orthwein v. Thomas, 127 Ill. 554 .) … The competent evidence in this record clearly establishes that Sheldon is the son of John J. Crilley and therefore the nephew of decedent.

Sanitary District of Chicago v. Martin

173 Ill. 243 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1898

referred to in this paragraph would, therefore, under this rule of construction be construed to be grounds which are open for the designated use to the public generally, and this view would seem to be emphasized by the qualifying … The district is authorized to make and establish docks, and to dispose by lease of any water-power, for its own benefit, ■that may be created in the construction and use of the channel.

Fenyes v. State Employees' Retirement System

17 Ill. 2d 106 · Illinois Supreme Court · May 22, 1959

It is conceded that the plaintiff would be entitled to the ordinary death benefit if decedent died while in service, but that she would not qualify for such benefit if he had effectually withdrawn from the service prior, … We further believe that the testimony of plaintiff’s medical witness failed to establish pre-existing incompetence on the part of Dr. Fenyes.

People ex rel. Chicago Bar Ass'n v. Czarnecki

268 Ill. 278 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1915

The trouble with this contention is that the evidence clearly shows the alleged payment to Donahue did not relieve the society from liability on the certificate, as is so clearly demonstrated by the case cited by respondent … That it was not an agreed order and that counsel for defendants had no knowledge of such order is also clearly-established by the evidence.