Case law

People v. Rush

322 Ill. App. 3d 1014 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 11, 2001

we do not believe that the Reddick rule established such a component of basic due process so as to fall within it.” … But clearly Reddick and Apprendi deal with similar concerns and concerns that, in our view, are of commensurate gravity.” Kizer, 318 Ill. App. 3d at 252 .

People v. Hilliard

457 Ill. Dec. 439 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 7, 2021

Louisiana clarified that Miller established both a substantive and a procedural requirement. 577 U.S. 190, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016). … Buffer aside, clearly, the defendant’s 40-year sentence was not Miller’s “life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

Stepan Co. v. Pollution Control Board

193 Ill. App. 3d 827 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 8, 1990

Because administrative agencies are inherently more qualified to decide technical problems, this court, when reviewing administrative rules and regulations, may not invalidate a regulation unless it is clearly arbitrary, … Stepan next asserts the compliance date established by the Board was arbitrary, unreasonable, and capricious. The Board adopted the rule on November 25, 1987, and established a December 31, 1987, compliance date.

Sigma Companies, Inc. v. Regas

255 Ill. App. 3d 857 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 1993

If plaintiff can establish that the solicitation of an interested party occurred during the period of time covered by the agreement, plaintiff is entitled to recovery. … Defendant further contends, however, that the buyer’s deposition clearly established that plaintiff did not solicit the buyer and that the buyer knew that the business was for sale prior to the meeting with plaintiff.

City of Evanston v. O'LEARY

244 Ill. App. 3d 190 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 16, 1993

The Act is clearly within the class of remedial statutes which are designed to grant remedies for the protection of rights, introduce regulation conducive to the public good, or cure public evils. [Citations.] … The Act is designed in some measure to provide protection to persons who rent premises to establish a residence.

Bruck v. Cincotta

56 Ill. App. 3d 260 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 27, 1978

malice; (4) that the statements were not defamatory as a matter of law nor libellous per se, and special damages were not pleaded to establish libel per quod. … In this regard, it has been clearly established in Illinois that to start an action libellous per quod, special damages must be alleged with particularity, and general allegations as to damages are insufficient, (von Solbrig

People v. McVeay

302 Ill. App. 3d 960 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 5, 1999

Our legislature has provided definitions for both classifications of individuals with clearly distinct criteria, and indeed, our legislature is vested with the authority to provide such definitions. See People v. … Inasmuch as defendant is the party challenging the constitutionality of a statute, he bears the burden of clearly establishing the constitutional violation. See People v. DePalma, 256 Ill. App. 3d 206, 210 (1994).

People v. LaGardo

59 Ill. App. 3d 780 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 3, 1978

Frank Mace testified for the State under a grant of immunity. … The testimony of Mace clearly was sufficient to raise the issue. See, e.g., People v. Rorer, 44 Ill. App. 3d 553, 557-58 (1976).

People v. Alberts

383 Ill. App. 3d 374 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 26, 2008

Defendant has not established ineffective assistance of counsel. … “I am unable to form an opinion at the current time as to whether [defendant] would qualify for an intoxication defense.

Costello v. Capital Cities Communications, Inc.

153 Ill. App. 3d 956 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 11, 1987

The judiciary's task in accommodating these competing interests is by no means new: at common law, the fair comment doctrine bestowed qualified immunity from libel actions as to certain types of opinions in order that writers … As a basis for doing so, the majority asserts that 1) the Illinois Supreme Court has considered and rejected the Ollman standards, 2) the protected-expression-of-opinion rule is not clearly established, 3) the Ollman standards

La Pointe v. Boddy

99 Ill. App. 3d 111 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 11, 1981

We note that the parties have not raised or argued the applicability of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 85, par. 1 — 101 et seq.) … The evidence clearly established that there was a difference in level between the paved road and the shoulder.

People v. Brown

2025 IL App (1st) 230772 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 23, 2025

However, generally immune is not the same as always immune, and defendant cites in support People v. Patterson, 192 Ill. 2d 93, 121 (2000). … ¶ 119 Application of the above quotes from Davis required a court to determine (1) whether the questioning qualified as police questioning and (2) whether the primary purpose of the questioner was to establish past

Dugan v. Weber

175 Ill. App. 3d 1088 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 17, 1988

The physician’s relationship to the case, not the substance of his testimony, qualifies him as a Rule 220 expert. … The cases cited by defendant involve testimony of particular facts already established at trial. In the instant case, Dr.

Topp v. Logan

197 Ill. App. 3d 285 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 30, 1990

In the instant case, the evidence presented by plaintiffs clearly conflicted with that presented by defendant. … Moreover, plaintiffs failed to establish that defendant’s conduct was the proximate cause of the injuries suffered by Topp.

MBA Enterprises, Inc. v. NI Gas Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 31, 1999

The plaintiffs' complaint alleges a number of negligent acts by NI Gas that clearly fall within the purview of installation and construction of the piping system. … Finally, the question decided on appeal in Cates was whether the defendant met its burden of establishing that a cold rolling mill was an improvement to real property.

Continental Homes of Chicago, Inc. v. County of Lake

37 Ill. App. 3d 727 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 23, 1976

Rezek testified for plaintiffs after being qualified as an expert consulting civil engineer. … The property is clearly suitable for the proposed purpose.

Richard's Tire Co. v. Zehnder

295 Ill. App. 3d 48 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 6, 1998

However, our review of the record leads us to clearly conclude that plaintiffs machinery is primarily used in the process of manufacturing retread tires. … This standard is well established in Illinois jurisprudence. See, e.g., Colorcraft Corp. v. Department of Revenue, 112 Ill. 2d 473, 481-82 (1986); Rodman v.

People v. Larson

196 N.E.3d 1187 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 10, 2022

Of the 16 statements presented, only 5 clearly met the definition of “representative.” … We recognize that we cannot definitively conclude that any of these people were not “household member[s] of” Kameron, such that they would qualify as a representative.

Triple A Services, Inc. v. Rice

174 Ill. App. 3d 654 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 19, 1988

Instead, plaintiffs’ evidence clearly established that before enacting the ordinance the city council did not consider any preenactment examinations or studies of the impact of mobile food vendors or their vehicles on the … Holtzman (1956), 8 Ill. 2d 87 , 93: ‘The mere fact that political rights and questions are involved does not create immunity from judicial review.

People v. Cooper

64 Ill. App. 3d 880 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 19, 1978

Stat. 1975, ch. 38, par. 105 — 1.01 et seq.), seeking the appointment of two qualified psychiatrists to examine the defendant, pursuant to the Act. … Further, the evidence showed that the defendant had engaged in aggressive sexual advances, forcing himself upon an 11-year-old girl— conduct clearly manifesting a mental disorder.