Case law

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.

William Blair & Co. v. Fi Liquidation Corp.

358 Ill. App. 3d 324 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 6, 2005

John Ettelson, a principal of Blair, commented that Blair would prefer neither qualifier, but chose to stay with “substantive” rather than use “material.” … Thus, there is clearly a question of fact on this issue.

Mitchell v. Stonecasters, LLC

2018 IL App (2d) 180127 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 28, 2019

The agreement gave plaintiff and Stonecasters each the right to select one “Qualified Appraiser.” … Those two “Qualified Appraisers” would then jointly select another “Qualified Appraiser,” who would ultimately be solely responsible for determining the fair market value of plaintiff’s interest at the time

Brummet v. Farel

217 Ill. App. 3d 264 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 2, 1991

Summary judgment is proper only where the evidence, when construed most strongly against the moving party, establishes clearly and without doubt the right thereto. (Fisher v. Crippen (1986), 144 Ill. … The general rule, however, is qualified. It applies only when a party’s testimony, taken as a whole, is unequivocal.

Uphold v. Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission

385 Ill. App. 3d 567 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 24, 2008

Based on all of the evidence set forth herein, [claimant’s] claim clearly falls within the ‘twilight zone’ as described by the courts. … Therefore, by exclusion, claimant qualifies as an “employee” under the pre-1972 version of the LHWCA. See 33 U.S.C. §902 (3) (1927).

People v. Wheeler

Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 27, 2002

The State also granted him immunity from any murder charges stemming from Love’s death. The parties stipulated that Karen Washington would offer the following testimony if called as a witness. … Smith’s testimony made that fact more probable and thus qualifies as relevant. For these reasons, we cannot conclude that the judge abused his discretion in admitting Smith’s testimony as relevant.

Chappell v. Board of Trustees of Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund

2020 IL App (1st) 192255 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 8, 2021

Klomann applies with full force in this case. ¶ 29 The record establishes that IMRF staff automatically accepted the Township’s pension eligibility certification and approved plaintiff’s Omitted Service … 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.

Quinn v. Sigma Rho Chapter of Beta Theta Pi Fraternity

155 Ill. App. 3d 231 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 1, 1987

The allegations also establish the excessive use of the intoxicants. … The activity was clearly an illegal hazing activity and discouraged by defendant’s own parent organization.

Auten v. Franklin

Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 6, 2010

While the legislature clearly intended a minimally responsible tortfeasor to be jointly and severally liable for all medical expenses for an injury he partially caused, we find the legislature clearly did not intend for … The instructions clearly established that the rights of defen- - 54 - dants, Franklin and Nord, are separate and distinct from one another: "The rights of the defendants,

Dod Technologies v. Mesirow Ins. Services

320 Ill. Dec. 221 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 14, 2008

Therefore, we conclude that section 10b(1) did not immunize defendant. We affirm the dismissal of the consumer fraud count. 4. … In light of this clear statement by the supreme court, the requests to admit clearly fall within the court's order pertaining to stays of "discovery."

La Salle National Bank v. County of Lake

27 Ill. App. 3d 10 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 21, 1975

We find that these additional requirements would not substantially benefit the future residents of the development and thus the additional requirements are clearly unreasonable. … The association or a public body would not be immune from the financial maladies associated with the operation of a golf course in these times of rising prices.

People v. Spera

303 Ill. App. 3d 834 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 31, 1999

The supreme court concluded, “A defendant guilty of a single offense cannot fulfill the criteria necessitating prison time, yet simultaneously qualify for probation under the Code. … We believe that the court clearly established that, where there is only one conviction, a sentence of probation cannot be imposed together with a sentence of imprisonment in the DOC because these dispositions amount to two

People v. Dismuke

2017 IL App (2d) 141203 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 7, 2017

The prosecutors gave Derrick Smith a proffer of immunity and agreed to write a letter recommending that he receive work release or home monitoring. … A trial court has discretion whether to grant a motion in limine, and we will not reverse its ruling unless the court clearly abused its discretion. People v. Hogan, 388 Ill.

People v. McCommon

79 Ill. App. 3d 853 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 26, 1979

In the case at bar the record does not clearly establish that Jones had a unique knowledge of the event such that the State’s failure to call him gave rise to an inference that Jones’ testimony would have been unfavorable … Defendant argues that the State failed to identify the voices on the tape and to show that Saladino was qualified to operate the recording equipment.

Pilarski v. Schmidt

298 Ill. App. 3d 682 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 1, 1998

The court’s order also established a visitation schedule for Tom, Mandy (Cindy’s daughter, Amanda), and Cindy’s other relatives. William timely appeals. … The law clearly permits such a decision by either the guardian or the surrogate, but only if certain criteria are met.

Borden Chemicals & Plastics, L.P. v. Zehnder

Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 14, 2000

The statute further defines the term "qualified property." … Clearly, the facts and circumstances of Quill are distinguishable from the present case.

Televation Telecommunication Systems, Inc. v. Saindon

169 Ill. App. 3d 8 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 28, 1988

In October 1984, Saindon collaborated with Timothy Rex and Janusz Dobrowolski to establish Digital Systems Research, Inc. (Digital). … We must next determine whether the information Saindon took qualified as trade secret information.

Swanson v. Village of Lake in the Hills

233 Ill. App. 3d 58 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 14, 1992

Lorenc testified that when plaintiff was hospitalized, he was clearly disabled. Lorenc ordered plaintiff to refrain from work until December 2, 1986. … An opposite conclusion must be clearly evident for a finding or judgment to be against the manifest weight of the evidence. Bruss, 210 Ill. App. 3d at 78 .

Western Casualty & Surety Co. v. Adams County

179 Ill. App. 3d 752 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 16, 1989

Stat. 1985, ch. 110, par. 2—701), requesting the court to establish the rights and legal relations of the parties under certain insurance policies issued to the County from May 1978 through May 1983. … arrest, erroneous service of civil papers, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, assault and battery, libel, slander, defamation of character, violation of property rights, or deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities

Norman v. U.S. Bank National Ass'n

2020 IL App (1st) 190765 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 30, 2020

All notices or offers shall clearly show the date the offer or notice was sent.” Chicago Municipal Code § 5-14-050(a)(3) (amended Apr. 15, 2015). … Bank has not established that the trial court’s award was an abuse of discretion.