Case law

People v. Blanks Opinion on Rehearing Opinion corrected on 12/01/05

Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 2005

“A lesser-included offense” is defined as an offense that “ ‘[i]s established by proof of the same or less than all of the facts or a less culpable mental state (or both), than that which is required to establish the commission … Defendant next asserts that the burglary indictment gave him no notice that he qualified for sentencing as a Class X offender or qualified for an extended term.

Larsen v. Provena Hospitals

2015 IL App (4th) 140255 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 26, 2015

Thus, by its plain language, the legislature clearly intended that the Whistleblower Act would apply to physicians who satisfied the statutory defini- tion of employee. … See 105 ILCS 5/14A-30 (West 2010) (ex- plaining the funding available through the Illinois Board of Education for qualified programs fo- cused on the education of gifted and talented children).

People v. Wilke

367 Ill. App. 3d 130 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 15, 2006

The judge qualified him as an expert in clandestine methamphetamine laboratories and, over a defense objection, in methamphetamine generally. … Accordingly, defense counsel clearly did not render ineffective assistance in failing to file a motion to suppress the evidence in question. 4.

Cantrall v. Great American Casualty Co.

256 Ill. App. 47 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 3, 1930

The evidence clearly establishes that the insured had been a steady workman for about 12 years and there is no evidence that he had ever lost any time from his work on account of illness except that at one time more than … We think to hold that such rights may be established by contract is carrying it to unwarranted extremes.”

People v. Keller

353 Ill. App. 3d 830 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 3, 2004

Our recognition of the importance of a procedural framework that has been clearly fixed in advance leads us to reject the reasoning of People v. Bramlett, 347 Ill. … We believe that the better approach is to adhere to the procedural framework established in Shellstrom, Pearson, and their progeny.

People v. Moody

97 Ill. App. 3d 758 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 2, 1981

In Dunaway, the police, who clearly had no probable cause to arrest, picked up and brought the defendant to the police station where he was interrogated about a robbery-murder. … On the other hand, an officer might have sufficient facts, but he may conclude that those facts do not establish probable cause.

Case v. Forloine

203 Ill. Dec. 256 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 1993

Plaintiffs appeal from this ruling, contending that: (1) the evidence established that defendants never applied for or took reasonable steps to obtain a mortgage within the time frame set forth in the mortgage contingency … For a finding or judgment to be against the manifest weight of the evidence, an opposite conclusion must be clearly evident. (In re Estate of Elson (1983), 120 Ill. App. 3d 649, 655 , 458 N.E.2d 637, 642 .)

Ass'n of Franciscan Sisters of Sacred Heart v. County of Vermilion

304 Ill. App. 243 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 11, 1940

Section 24 clearly establishes an obligation upon the county to pay for the medical and surgical expenses of those persons who are not technically paupers, but who are nevertheless unable to pay the necessary expenses of … Qualifying words are made applicable to those preceding and not extended to the following words, unless such extension or inclusion is clearly required by the intent and meaning of the context or disclosed by an examination

People v. Stackhouse

Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 30, 2004

Nor do we believe that Officer Ferguson's testimony qualifies as "some evidence" that Ortiz "perceived" the defendant. … Ortiz testified very clearly that he recognized the woman because she approached him and they had a conversation.

Palier v. Dreis & Krump Manufacturing Co.

81 Ill. App. 2d 1 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 27, 1967

Essentially, this theory of indemnity has found its way into Illinois law because of this State’s long established refusal to allow contribution among tortfeasors who acted in pari delicto. … New City further maintains that its indemnity action is separate and apart from the Scaffold Act and the immunities granted employees thereunder.

Zeitz v. Village of Glenview

Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 5, 1999

Our review of the record shows that the trial court was not clearly erroneous in finding that plaintiffs failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that the R-E zoning classification was arbitrary and capricious … (footnote: 2) The trial court was not clearly erroneous in finding that plaintiffs failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that the R-E zoning ordinance as applied to the property was arbitrary, unreasonable

Chappell v. Board of Trustees of Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund

445 Ill. Dec. 204 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 31, 2020

¶ 41 IMRF clearly has the power under Illinois law to suspend benefit payments and retain amounts paid to an annuitant in error. … Clearly, plaintiff’s reliance on the acts undertaken by the Township and IMRF was not reasonable. Equitable relief is not warranted here. See Gambino v. Boulevard Mortgage Corp., 398 Ill.

Union Planters Bank, N.A. v. Thompson Coburn LLP

402 Ill. App. 3d 317 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 3, 2010

The evidence at the trial established that a qualified corporate trustee was licensed under a regulatory body as a corporation to be engaged in the offering of trust services to the public. … “Rather, to establish her injury, the plaintiff must establish that she incurred additional attorney fees.” Nettleton, 387 Ill. App. 3d at 755 .

Baruxen v. Hacker

2025 IL App (5th) 240701 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 11, 2025

The Concealed Carry Act allows qualified individuals to obtain a license to carry concealed handguns in public. … Plaintiffs argue that the plain language of subsections (c)(2) and (d) of section 5 of the Civil Rights Act (740 ILCS 23/5(c)(2), (d) (West 2022)) clearly indicates that they are eligible to recover these fees and costs

Thomas v. Page

Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 20, 2005

Accordingly, the fourth condition for the establishment of a privilege is also satisfied. … There are crucial distinctions between an absolute and a qualified privilege.

Armstrong v. United Insurance Co. of America

98 Ill. App. 3d 1132 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 30, 1981

He admitted on cross-examination that the mere fact somebody was unemployed did not necessarily mean they would not qualify for insurance. … The words of the receipt do not clearly counter this assumption.

Davis v. Keystone Printing Service, Inc.

111 Ill. App. 3d 427 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 30, 1982

That section clearly includes affirmative defenses. (Millsaps v. Bankers Life Co. (1976), 35 Ill. App. 3d 735, 742 , appeal denied (1976), 63 Ill. 2d 552 .) … The court decided that it “need not in this case decide whether plaintiff was a public figure or public official, because the facts justify following Farnsworth and holding that this case clearly qualifies under the Butts

People Ex Rel. Latimer v. Board of Education of Chicago

341 Ill. App. 554 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 17, 1950

The right of the board to make these changes is clearly established in People ex rel. Laist v. … certifying the relator as city architect but before his appointment as such by the commissioner of the department of public works, revoked the certificate because it appeared that relator was not a licensed architect and qualified

Davis v. International Harvester Co.

167 Ill. App. 3d 814 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 13, 1988

While we are free to consider Harvester’s arguments as grounds for affirming the trial court’s judgment, Harvester clearly lacks standing to appeal. (Boles Trucking, 138 Ill. App. 3d at 772 .) … With respect to Darnell, plaintiff’s allegations do not establish that she lied.

Formento v. Joyce

168 Ill. App. 3d 429 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 15, 1988

This undisputed evidence clearly establishes, as a matter of law, that there was no attorney-client relationship between the plaintiffs in this case and the various defendants. … A class action is not, however, a mandatory course of action in every case that might otherwise qualify as a class action.