Case law

Morrison v. Community Unit School District No. 1

44 Ill. App. 3d 315 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 16, 1976

Stat. 1969, ch. 122, par. 24—24), a school district and its certificated personnel were immune for liability for acts of negligence and that liability for conduct in the supervision of student activities must be established … Johnson and counsel each had copies of the hospital records, but it does not clearly reflect how such hospital records were used in introducing the testimony. On cross-examination, Dr.

McGownd v. Illinois-American Water Company

2026 IL App (4th) 250332-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 13, 2026

Section 3-104 clearly immunizes the City from liability based upon such allegations. … The statutory language is not qualified, containing “no exception for willful and wanton misconduct.” Id.

People v. Perez-Gonzalez

2014 IL App (2d) 120946 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 30, 2014

As in Powers, the respondent’s conduct clearly qualified as criminal contempt. See also United States v. … In Matos, the State sought and the trial court approved a grant of immunity in order to compel the defendant to testify against his codefendants.

Bohn Aluminum & Brass Co. v. Barker

3 Ill. App. 3d 600 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 1, 1972

JUSTICE CRAVEN dissenting: I do not agree that the issuance of a temporary restraining order by the circuit court and the subsequent refusal to dissolve it is immune from review on appeal. … Clearly, there was adequate time and opportunity for notice.

Paramount Pictures Distributing Corp. v. Gehring

283 Ill. App. 581 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 11, 1936

In the case of the apartment, the rule is well established that a landlord’s damages consist of the rental stipulated in the lease and that he establishes his case to recover the lease rental in the event of the tenant’s … Their intention, which has been clearly manifested, cannot be disregarded by the court when the result is not shown to have been unconscionable.

Ferguson v. Ryan

251 Ill. App. 3d 1042 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 19, 1993

committeeman of another established political party; 3. a judge of election pursuant to Article 13 or 14 of The Election Code for another established political party; 4. a voter who voted in the primary election of another … established political party.”

State of Minnesota ex rel. Gulley v. Caldwell

198 Ill. App. 3d 91 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 1, 1990

Beverly Pohl testified for the plaintiff as a qualified expert witness in the area of genetic blood testing to establish paternity. … Defendant has not shown that the verdict of the jury was clearly erroneous, and we will not reverse on that basis.

Slezak v. Girzadas

167 Ill. App. 3d 1045 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 8, 1988

The sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred by refusing to qualify plaintiff’s expert witness as a medical expert on the ground that he had failed to establish that he was familiar with the community standards … Laskin clearly indicated his familiarity with the Zimmer plate surgical procedure and testified as to the similarity of standard of care between New York and Chicago.

Laffoon v. Bell & Zoller Coal Co.

27 Ill. App. 3d 472 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 21, 1975

Industrial Com., 57 Ill.2d 113 , our supreme court reiterated the established principle of law that a contract of employment cannot exist without the consent of both parties, saying at page 119: "It is not possible for a … Clearly, the legislature did not intend to give "statutory employers" a bonus by virtue of section 1(a)(3) as the majority holds. The interpretation invites total emasculation of the Structural Work Act.

People v. George O.

314 Ill. App. 3d 1044 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 26, 2000

The State conversely maintains that (1) the circuit court’s order was proper, as clear and convincing evidence established by Dr. … We, therefore, decline to apply waiver in this case, since the State’s failure to comply with section 3 — 610 appears on the face of the record and clearly prejudiced George O.

Concerned Citizens & Property Owners v. Illinois Commerce Comm'n

2018 IL App (5th) 150551 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 19, 2018

. ¶ 11 In response, GBX and the Commission argue that “the definition of ‘public utility’ clearly applies to new entrants.” … Id. ¶¶ 48, 51. ¶ 19 Here, GBX similarly fails to establish that it was a public utility at the time it filed its application with the Commission.

People v. Miller

20 Ill. App. 3d 1061 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 3, 1974

Whether one not qualified as an expert may given an opinion on the identity of fingerprints. b. Whether the court erred in admitting hearsay to establish the identity of the fingerprints in People’s Exhibit #3. c. … Whether the trial court committed plain error in admitting into evidence a police booking card which clearly indicated prior criminal activity by the defendant. 3.

People v. Adams

198 Ill. App. 3d 74 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 5, 1990

As such, the registration requirement at issue here clearly serves a legitimate governmental purpose. … In doing so, we are mindful that legislative enactments carry a strong presumption of constitutionality, and the party challenging the statute has the burden of clearly establishing its invalidity. (People v.

People v. C.B.

308 Ill. App. 3d 227 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 19, 1999

The State contends that section 2 — 18 (4) (a) of the Juvenile Court Act is immune from the requirement that writings speak for themselves based upon language contained in the statute that states, “All other circumstances … We cannot say that the opposite conclusion is clearly evident from the record or that the trial court’s conclusion is unreasonable, arbitrary, and not based on the evidence presented.

Northern Trust Co. v. Continental Illinois National Bank & Trust Co.

43 Ill. App. 3d 169 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 13, 1976

The Chicago Foundation was, in fact, a qualified charitable organization under section 501(c)(3). … Here, the trustees clearly exercised their discretion by nominating various charities for grants.

Sardiga v. Northern Trust Company

Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 15, 2011

In order to prevail under the Act, it is the plaintiff who must establish that his employer retaliated against him for his refusal to participate in a qualifying activity. 740 ILCS 174/20 (West 2004). … The record does not clearly establish that Hines misrepresented or concealed material facts or that he knew at the time he made the representations that they were untrue.

Cook v. Boothman

24 Ill. App. 2d 552 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 28, 1960

In the cases cited, the record clearly established that the person who was struck was properly upon the highway and not performing any negligent act. This is not the situation here. … There was no evidence that she was immunized from contributory negligence by becoming disabled, as in Bell, or by being up against a barricade, as in Russell.

Distaola v. Department of Registration & Education

72 Ill. App. 3d 977 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 5, 1979

It is well established that an injunction is an extraordinary remedy which is not granted as a matter of course but is granted only after plaintiff establishes the existence of a lawful right, irreparable harm and inadequate … In Schwarz the court held that testimony given under a grant of immunity in a criminal prosecution was admissible in disbarment proceedings.

Cunningham v. Yazoo Manufacturing Co.

39 Ill. App. 3d 498 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 31, 1976

The witness had clearly established his expertise as to safety engineering and design of agricultural equipment, including riding mowers, and had conducted various tests, including braking tests, on this particular mower. … Both of these errors in excluding evidence were clearly prejudicial to plaintiff.

Golf Trust of America, L.P. v. Soat

355 Ill. App. 3d 333 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 18, 2005

This testimony clearly shows that the 1999 reassessment was done to revise and correct the general reassessment that had not been completed by the township assessor. … We answer this question in the affirmative, and we conclude that there was insufficient evidence to clearly and convincingly establish a violation of equal protection in the valuation of objectors’ property.