Case law

People v. Mankowski

28 Ill. App. 3d 641 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 1, 1975

Officer Batka’s testimony clearly establishes that he gave the defendant a copy of the written notice and read the notice to the defendant. … It is apparent to us that defendant’s own trial testimony establishes that he understood the purpose of the breathalyzer test.

Smith v. Chicago, Peoria & St. Louis Railway Co.

143 Ill. App. 128 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 21, 1908

While a single act or omission does not necessarily establish incompetency as a matter of law, such act or omission may tend so strongly to prove a person to be careless, imprudent and unfitted for a particular position, … If, however, his subsequent incompetency can be said to have been established, such statements were admissible as tending to show notice to appellant of such fact at the time they were made.

Forest Glen Brick & Tile Co. v. Gade

55 Ill. App. 181 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 6, 1894

The surplus stock above $30,000 was not called in and canceled pro rata, and a new. basis of holdings established. … That case is, however, clearly distinguishable from the one under consideration.

People v. Garcia

405 Ill. App. 3d 608 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 5, 2010

Defendant’s own statement, which he claimed was the product of coercion and beaten out of him, clearly distanced himself from the victim. … There, a witness testified concerning the scope of the immunity he was granted. However, the State knew the scope of the immunity was much broader than what the witness described while testifying.

Dillavou v. County Officers Electoral Board

260 Ill. App. 3d 127 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 21, 1994

Curran knew, however, that to qualify for reelection in the 100th district in 1994 he had to establish residence in the 100th district at least 18 months prior to the 1994 general election. Ill. Const. 1970, art. … Secondarily, Curran wanted to establish, "absolutely,” that he maintained a residence in the 100th district.

People v. Durant

2024 IL App (1st) 211190-B · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 25, 2024

Based on his prior convictions of numerous Class X offenses, the statute clearly did apply. … Nor has he established a violation of his due process rights. Consequently, he has not shown the cause and prejudice necessary for leave to file a successive postconviction petition.

Slenker v. Grand Lodge of State of Illinois of Independent Order of Odd Fellows

344 Ill. App. 1 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 29, 1949

“The holding in the Parks case clearly exempts the trust funds of a charity from any liability for the torts of its agents and employees. … We are of the opinion there is no justification for absolute immunity if the trust is protected, because that has been the reason for the rule of absolute immunity.

Lieberman v. Liberty Healthcare Corporation

Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 11, 2011

Defendants also argued (1) they were immune from suit under statutory and common law and sovereign immunity and (2) the "Heck rule" supported their collateral-estoppel argument and should be adopted as Illinois law. … Clearly, a successful claim would be inconsistent with their lawful commitments.

Johnson v. Core-Vent Corp.

264 Ill. App. 3d 833 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 29, 1993

The only exceptions stated in section 13-212(a) concern legal disability or fraudulent concealment, exceptions for which Core-Vent does not qualify. … Brush (1973), 53 Ill.2d 405 , 292 N.E.2d 372 (Tort Immunity Act); Patsis v.

Crossman v. BD. OF ELECTION COM'RS

359 Ill. Dec. 197 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 20, 2012

The Code provides that the statement of candidacy: "shall set out the address of such candidate, the office for which he is a candidate, shall state that the candidate is a qualified primary voter of the party to which the … petition relates, is qualified for the office specified and has filed a statement of economic interests as required by the Illinois Governmental Ethics Act, shall request that the candidate's name be placed upon the official

Poulos v. Lutheran Social Services of Illinois, Inc.

Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 24, 2000

A conditional or qualified privilege requires, among other things, proof of good faith. 12 Illinois Jurisprudence, Personal Injury & Torts §17:62 (1994). … Accordingly, defendants have shown no error in the denial of their motion for a directed verdict on the issue of conditional or qualified privilege.

O'BRIEN v. Meyer

196 Ill. App. 3d 457 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 10, 1990

She established a pulmonary function laboratory at Northwestern University during her two-year stay there. … The court also noted, “Once the fact of such license has been established, it lies within the sound discretion of the trial court to determine if the witness is qualified as an expert regarding the standard of care.” ( 77

McFatridge v. Madigan

2011 IL App (4th) 100936 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 14, 2011

Sovereign Immunity ¶ 45 The Attorney General also argues McFatridge’s mandamus complaint is barred by sovereign immunity to the extent it seeks to control the Attorney General’s exercise of discretion. … Here, McFatridge is clearly being sued for actions he took in prosecuting Steidl and Whitlock while the elected State’s Attorney of Edgar County.

People Ex Rel. Department of Transportation v. City of Chicago

36 Ill. App. 3d 712 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 27, 1976

delivered the opinion of the court: This appeal arises from the dismissal of plaintiff’s action because of its failure to comply with the statutory notice requirement of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employee’s Tort Immunity … Clearly, if the actions of Mrs. Repaskey were deemed inadequate to meet the stringent requirements of written notice, those of plaintiff in the case at bar cannot be held sufficient.

Alivio Medical Center v. ILLINOIS DEPT. OF REV.

299 Ill. App. 3d 647 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 1998

Alivio has an established policy for billing. All new patients are referred to the financial evaluator for assessment of their capabilities to pay. … Clearly, there was profit from this enterprise, and according to the standard set in German Hospital, a charitable hospital does not make a profit. Thus, Alivio does not meet this standard.

Ficke v. Evangelical Health Systems

221 Ill. Dec. 95 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 13, 1996

The Act codifies Illinois’ common law and constitutional rights to forgo life-sustaining treatment and establishes a private decision-making process allowing a surrogate to be chosen from a hierarchical list of candidates … The Act clearly, and in mandatory terms, obligates the attending physician to medically diagnose both lack of decisional capacity and the existence of a qualifying condition, including its cause.

Hernandez v. Chicago Park District

274 Ill. App. 3d 970 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 28, 1995

The standard to be employed by this court in assessing the propriety of a denial of a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is well established. … The evidence clearly demonstrates that the park district actually created the danger at issue in this case and thus it is absolutely incredible to claim lack of constructive notice as a defense. See Harding v.

Carrillo v. Jam Productions, Ltd.

108 Ill. App. 3d 126 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 23, 1982

In order for the court to grant a preliminary injunction, the plaintiff must establish that (1) he possesses a clearly ascertainable right which needs protection; (2) he will suffer irreparable harm without the injunction … Injunctive relief is such an extraordinary remedy that the plaintiff must plead facts which clearly establish his right to this relief.

Thomas v. Chicago Transit Authority

2014 IL App (1st) 122402 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 6, 2015

Upon good cause shown, an employee could request a one-year extension to establish a qualified residence prior to the expiration of the original six-month period. ¶4 Thomas was hired by the CTA in June … The clearly erroneous standard of review is applied when the facts are “admitted or established, the controlling rule of law is undisputed” and the issue is whether the facts satisfy the legal standard.

People v. Washington

375 Ill. App. 3d 1012 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 24, 2007

Barnes was subsequently granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for his agreement to testify. … Accordingly, as evidenced by Cooper and the cases cited above, accountability convictions have been affirmed when the records reflect affirmative conduct that clearly evidences the defendants’ intent to further the crimes