Case law

Andrews v. Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago

2018 IL App (1st) 170336 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 5, 2018

” ¶ 20 An employee may qualify for discretionary immunity if he holds either a position involving the determination of policy or a position involving the exercise of discretion. Cabrera v. … However, an employee who qualifies 7 No. 1-17-0336 for discretionary immunity based on his responsibilities must also have engaged in both the determination of policy

Lewis-Connelly v. Board of Education

214 Ill. Dec. 92 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 25, 1996

These laws, as implied terms of the contract, established conditions precedent to the effectiveness and enforceability of the contracts. … These provisions established a condition that plaintiff be certified in the subject area she was hired to teach.

People v. Maya

2019 IL App (3d) 180275 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 17, 2019

In establishing that standard, the United States Supreme Court cautioned that judicial scrutiny of counsel’s performance must be highly deferential. Id. at 689. … Id. at 336. ¶ 30 As Manning demonstrates, a claim that counsel’s decisions in jury selection amounted to ineffective assistance is not wholly immune from review.

People v. Hightshoe

155 Ill. App. 3d 371 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 14, 1987

Stat. 1985, ch. 91%, pars. 1 — 120, 3 — 702, 3 — 703) and that the State failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that she is a person subject to involuntary commitment (Ill. Rev. … In these cases, the court found that where the record clearly demonstrated noncompliance with the relevant statutory provisions, the judgment entered was erroneous and without effect.

OKO, LLC v. Illinois Dept. of Revenue

355 Ill. Dec. 249 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 20, 2011

. ¶ 2 OKO appeals, arguing the Department's denial was clearly erroneous where, under the terms of the sale-leaseback agreement, the previous owner, who is also the lessee, retained sufficient indicia of ownership to qualify … The ALJ complains here that OKO "did not clearly establish through documentary evidence" that the Center had a troubled financial history, that the sale-and-leaseback was its only financing option, or why the Regions Bank

Chicago Railways Co. v. R. F. Conway Co.

219 Ill. App. 220 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 6, 1920

It is a general and long-established rule of law that neither contribution nor indemnity will be given to one of several joint tort-feasors against the others. … But this rule is qualified as stated by the Supreme Court of Massachusetts in the case of Lowell v. Boston & L. R.

People v. Richards

461 Ill. Dec. 123 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 2, 2021

¶4 At sentencing, the court stated that Richards was subject to a prison term of 7 to 14 years based on statutory sentencing guidelines established in the Safe Neighborhoods Reform Act. … he would have received a lower sentence to establish ineffective assistance

Gould v. Campbell's Ambulance Service, Inc.

130 Ill. App. 3d 598 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 5, 1984

A qualified ambulance attendant and driver shall 4. … On appeal, defendant maintains, as it did in the trial court, that plaintiffs have failed to state or establish a cause of action for retaliatory discharge.

People v. Baker

110 Ill. App. 3d 1015 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 6, 1982

Defendant first maintains that the evidence did not establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We disagree. … The State, in its brief, concedes that while Lesniewski may “technically qualify as an accomplice, her involvement in the crime appears to have been only peripheral.” In People v.

People v. Clark

84 Ill. App. 3d 186 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 21, 1980

The facts which gave rise to these criminal charges are set out in fuU in our previous decision in this case and need not be repeated here except to note that the evidence established that on October 12, 1975, defendant fired … Ct. 306 ,309: “[T]he 14th Amendment does not, in guaranteeing equal protection of the laws, assure uniformity of judicial decisions [citation], any more than, in guaranteeing due process, it assures immunity from judicial

Moriarity v. Rockford Health Systems, Inc.

365 Ill. App. 3d 378 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 2, 2006

As such, another qualified physician’s concurrence in Dr. … Allen clearly did not have a terminal condition, was not permanently unconscious, and was not afflicted with an incurable or irreversible condition as those terms are defined by the Act.

People v. Lane

256 Ill. App. 3d 38 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 13, 1993

He was qualified as an expert in the composition of bullet lead. … Lane that immunity protects him from everything except perjury. That if he lied, immunity doesn’t protect him.”

In Re Marriage of Decker

204 Ill. App. 3d 566 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 16, 1990

Were it otherwise, an individual could always immunize any comment he made simply by communicating it to his attorney. … To qualify as such, a communication must be made within the ambit of a legitimate professional relationship.

Verdeyen v. Board of Education of Batavia Public School District No. 101

150 Ill. App. 3d 915 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 5, 1986

Section 21 — 25 clearly states that an applicant for a school service personnel certificate must possess a bachelor’s degree in order to be issued the certificate. … The party claiming estoppel bears the burden of establishing it by clear, concise, and unequivocal evidence. (Johnson v. Security Insurance Co. (1985), 135 Ill. App. 3d 690, 694 , 481 N.E.2d 1263 .)

Robinson v. KFC National Management Co.

171 Ill. App. 3d 867 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 9, 1988

These will ordinarily be situations in which the law has already clearly recognized duality of legal persons, so that it may be realistically assumed that a legislature would have intended that duality to be respected. … Thus1 his employer could not claim any inherited immunity from the manufacturing . corporation, with which it had merged, by virtue of the exclusivity provision of workers’ compensation law.

People v. Dasaky

303 Ill. App. 3d 986 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 23, 1999

The issue in Weilmuenster was whether the defendant was entitled to "use" immunity or "transactional" immunity. … Even so, in our view, the record in this case established that there was no agreement with defendant binding the CCSAO after defendant's third arrest.

United Delivery Service, Ltd. v. Didrickson

213 Ill. Dec. 452 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 12, 1995

The report stated that UDS failed to prove that its drivers qualified as independent contractors under section 212 of the Unemployment Insurance Act (Ill. Rev. … The drivers therefore were engaged in an independently established occupation.

Vance v. Chandler

231 Ill. App. 3d 747 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 22, 1992

In the instant case, we find the plaintiff’s allegations which describe the conspirators’ actions in soliciting, hiring and paying an individual to murder the plaintiff are acts which clearly qualify as unlawful acts. … Furthermore, those same acts also qualify as overt acts. An “overt act” is defined as “[a]n outward act done in pursuance and manifestation of an intent or design.”

Floyd Ex Rel. Floyd v. Rockford Park Dist.

355 Ill. App. 3d 695 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 12, 2005

Now, if a plaintiff pleads facts sufficient to establish willful and wanton conduct as presently defined in section 1-210 of the Act, the public entity or public employee is not immune from liability. Packard v. … In conclusion, we hold that plaintiff failed to allege facts sufficient to establish willful and wanton conduct, and, thus, the trial court properly granted defendants' motion to dismiss based on the immunity conferred in

People v. Montgomery

18 Ill. App. 3d 828 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 21, 1974

The statement was clearly hearsay because it was intended to prove the truth of the matter asserted. … Such an assertion is not encompassed within any of the established hearsay exceptions, is not supported by any legal authority, and is rejected by this court.