Case law

In re M.H.

2015 IL App (4th) 150397 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 3, 2016

She is up to date on all medical examinations and immunizations.” ¶ 15 M.H., who, at birth, tested positive for alcohol and cannabis, has several medical problems. … We do not doubt the sincerity of his desire to establish a relationship with her.

People v. Hernandez

Appellate Court of Illinois · May 25, 2000

Defendant claims that the CI's statement is clearly exculpatory evidence. In our minds, it is not. The CI explicitly states that defendant could have participated in the murders. … We find that defendant has failed to establish that he was prejudiced by the denial of his motion for a continuance.

Thompson v. Department of Human Services

2024 IL App (1st) 221002 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 2, 2024

On her voicemail, he left a message indicating that the case did not qualify for a reopen request and that a new application would have to be filed. … A finding is against the manifest weight only if the opposite conclusion is clearly evident. Parikh, 2014 IL App (1st) 123319, ¶ 28.

Whitman v. Lopatkiewicz

152 Ill. App. 3d 332 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 12, 1987

The extensive deposition testimony of parties and post-occurrence witnesses clearly shows that there is no evidence upon which a jury could predicate a finding of defendant’s liability. … Gruber were duly qualified as an expert reconstruction witness, his sole function would be to impeach the credible testimony of the defendant.

Budka v. Board of Public Safety Commissioners

120 Ill. App. 3d 348 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 14, 1983

Approximately seven months later, while in his probationary period, plaintiff established a residence in Rosemont. On September 22, 1977, plaintiff established residence in Schaumburg. … The court found that the statutory language referring to “eligible” persons established preemployment qualifications but did not establish a residency requirement.

People v. Chancy

91 Ill. App. 3d 817 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 10, 1980

He qualified his answer about his previous record to show that he was referring to felonies. … Testimony regarding this wording on the blackboard was not hearsay, but was clearly admissible.

Thompson v. Illinois Department of Human Services

2024 IL App (1st) 221002 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 27, 2024

On her voicemail, he left a message indicating that the case did not qualify for a reopen request and that a new application would have to be filed. … A finding is against the manifest weight only if the opposite conclusion is clearly evident. Parikh, 2014 IL App (1st) 123319, ¶ 28.

Regal Motors, Inc. v. Fiat Motors of North America, Inc.

133 Ill. App. 3d 370 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 13, 1985

Rather, plaintiff had to merely accept appointment as a service and parts center under the service agreement in order to qualify for the discounts. … Illinois case law has clearly established that an order denying class certification is not final and may be appealed from only under the permissive interlocutory appeals provisions of Supreme Court Rule 308 (73 Ill. 2d R.

Cook County Sheriff v. Bianchi

Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 24, 1998

A passing score was established to be a minimum of 57 correct answers. … The sheriff took the position that when an employee was clearly shown not to have been properly certified, that employee could be fired at will, without a hearing. Vanko , 278 Ill. App. 3d at 303 .

Akemann v. Quinn

17 N.E.3d 223 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 26, 2014

After July 1, plaintiff continued to serve during the 60-day holdover period established by Public Act 97-719, as the Governor had not appointed a replacement. … Public Act 97-719 clearly intended to give the Governor exclusive authority to make all renewal appointments starting after it went into effect.

Anderson v. Department of Professional Regulation

284 Ill. Dec. 575 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 13, 2004

Gorchynsky to be more qualified and giving his testimony more weight, disagreed with the ALJ. The Board found that the following acts or omissions by Dr. … The Director’s decision was not clearly erroneous and therefore must be affirmed.

Fortman v. Aurora Civil Service Commission

37 Ill. App. 3d 548 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 15, 1976

This is a patently specious argument, which, if accepted, could immunize from “moral turpitude” the acts of any drug pusher who merely feeds, rather than initiates, an addict’s habit. … The language of section 15.02, which lists causes for discharge (including subsection (j) under which plaintiff was discharged) clearly states: “The following grounds shall be sufficient cause for removal of an employee from

Mack Industries, Ltd. v. The Village of Dolton

30 N.E.3d 518 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 31, 2015

A motion to dismiss should not be granted "unless it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief." Tedrick v. … of Sleepy Hollow court, however, reasoned that section 2-201 does not always control because "[s]ection 2-201 begins with the phrase, '[e]xcept as otherwise provided by Statute' (745 ILCS 10/2-201 (West 2000)), which clearly

People v. Maiden

210 Ill. App. 3d 390 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 1, 1991

Consequently, the evidence clearly established that defendant Rayford controlled the premises where the contraband was discovered. … In the case at bar, the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion to suppress was not clearly erroneous.

Burr v. Brooks

75 Ill. App. 3d 80 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 24, 1979

Witnesses also testified that there are still significant numbers of indigent people in Bloomington who require medical and hospital care but are unable to pay for it and do not qualify for existing financial assistance. … Chicago City Missionary Society (1940), 375 Ill. 220 , 30 N.E.2d 657 , the court stated the following dictum: “A clearly expressed desire of the donor that his property be devoted to another purpose, unless execution of the

People v. GRIHAM

399 Ill. App. 3d 1169 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 13, 2010

A double enhancement is not improper if the legislature clearly expresses an intent to allow it. People v. Owens, 377 Ill. App. 3d 302, 304 , 878 N.E.2d 1189, 1191-92 (2007). … The State chose to do so by establishing defendant had a 1996 felony conviction under the Controlled Substances Act.

Beahringer v. Roberts

334 Ill. App. 3d 622 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 21, 2002

Count V claimed that both letters were returned to him with a notice that they must be delivered unsealed because they did not qualify as “legal mail.” … To prove the plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief, he is required to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that (1) he possesses a certain and clearly ascertainable right which needs protection, (2) he would

Walsh v. County Officers Electoral Board

267 Ill. App. 3d 972 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 3, 1994

Initially, Walsh asserts that McAfee’s actions were not sufficient to qualify him as a resident of the 47th district. … Consequently, any issue not clearly defined and sufficiently presented is similarly deemed waived. (Vincent v. Doebert (1989), 183 Ill. App. 3d 1081, 1087 .)

People v. Rhoades

74 Ill. App. 3d 247 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 12, 1979

Clearly, once the officer observed what he reasonably believed to be cannabis, probable cause existed to arrest defendant. … Since the evidence in question was clearly shown to consist in part of cannabis, the statutory definition was met.

People v. Fiumetto

109 N.E.3d 756 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 12, 2018

It is not clearly and beyond a reasonable doubt intended for the illegal use of a controlled substance. See 720 ILCS 600/6 (West 2016). … Otherwise, any item that a person used to consume drugs would, without more, qualify as drug paraphernalia, irrespective of the definition set forth in section 2(d).