Case law

People v. White

69 Ill. App. 3d 830 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 12, 1979

The State then stipulated to the fact that McCullough had received immunity from prosecution for her testimony before the grand jury, except that she was not immune from prosecution for perjury. … It is well established that in a bench trial, the determination of credibility and the weight to be given testimony, are matters within the province of the trier of fact, since he has the superior opportunity to observe the

People v. Harris

2015 IL App (4th) 140696 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 18, 2015

Defendant has not established McKinney did or said anything to indicate defendant had no right to refuse. The warning to motorist reads, in pertinent part, “you are warned: 1. … Defendant voluntarily consented to the blood test and clearly had a choice whether to consent to testing.

Brink's, Inc. v. Illinois Commerce Commission

103 Ill. App. 3d 851 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 31, 1981

The Commission shall issue a certificate to any qualified applicant therefor after hearing, pursuant to an application filed, authorizing the whole or any part of the operation covered by the application, and may attach to … This and other testimony clearly established that the service provided by appellees was inadequate and that shippers had needs which were not met by appellees.

People v. Gholston

332 Ill. App. 3d 179 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 27, 2002

“A rule that qualifies under this exception must not only improve accuracy, but also ‘alter our understanding of the bedrock procedural elements’ essential to the fairness of a proceeding.” (Emphasis omitted.) Sawyer v. … Ct. 1712 (1986) (Batson), and other cases related to the rule established in Gideon.

Daly v. Carmean

210 Ill. App. 3d 19 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 7, 1991

Carmean had possessed and applied the skill and care of a reasonably well qualified podiatrist during his treatment of Mr. … Clearly, the Florida treatment in Aznel was not a continuing part of the prior allegedly negligent treatment given a decade earlier in Illinois. Plaintiff has cited Metzger v.

In Re JRY

157 Ill. App. 3d 396 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 29, 1987

In a case such as this one, such a result is clearly against the best interests of the minor. … The criminal record set forth in the presentence report clearly establishes an affinity toward violations of the law, many of which resulted in incarceration. Some of the minor offenses related to alcohol.

Grainger v. Harrah's Casino

18 N.E.3d 265 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 16, 2014

A reviewing court ordinarily will not reverse a trial court for giving faulty instructions unless they clearly misled the jury and resulted in prejudice to the appellant. Id. at 274; see also Stift v. … Our supreme court has never held or implied that a defendant in a false imprisonment case may establish that he had probable cause to detain the plaintiff only if he shows that he conducted a reasonable investigation before

People Ex Rel. Martin v. Smith

205 Ill. App. 3d 553 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 26, 1990

Plaintiff has failed to show that the limitations section in any way exempts the State of Illinois from the clearly stated limitations period. For this reason the case is dismissed.” … As we hold the statute of limitations within section 12(a) does not apply to bar the Department’s action under section 12(b), we need not address the issue raised by the Department on governmental immunity to statutes of

Board of Education of City of Chicago v. Industrial Comm'n

182 Ill. App. 3d 983 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 5, 1989

Therefore, the issue raised is whether or not claimant’s mental illness under the facts here presented qualifies as an occupational disease which arose out of and in the course of his employment and that the disease developed … A comparison of the facts in Pathfinder with the facts in this case clearly demonstrates that the event described by claimant was not the sudden severe emotional shock that the supreme court found to be compensable in Pathfinder

Medow v. Flavin

Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 27, 2002

This latter clause, however, clearly relates to the former–"[Medow's] association with Way to Go Travel was terminated on August 25, 1988[,] for theft." … Pertinence The litigation privilege provides immunity from civil suit for defamatory statements made preliminary to or during the course of litigation so long as the defamatory matter is pertinent to the litigation.

People v. DeFilippis

54 Ill. App. 2d 137 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 29, 1964

In the Jones case, the Supreme Court qualified the principle which had been applied by the lower federal courts for many years, that is, that to establish standing, a petition to suppress evidence must show that the petitioner … These statements clearly reveal that while the indictment in the Jones case did not make possession in itself the crime, the Supreme Court made clear that possession constituted the proof thereof.

Lavazzi v. McDonald's Corp.

239 Ill. App. 3d 403 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 31, 1992

Construing the evidence in the record liberally in plaintiff’s favor clearly shows that defendant did not undertake a duty to care for the safety of Otto’s employees. … The record clearly shows that Otto exercised independent control of its workers’ safety.

Mitchell v. Cook County Officers Electoral Board

Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 5, 2010

The Board conscientiously considered those objections and took appropriate curative action based upon established decisional law. … Consequently, this matter was clearly not before the Board at the outset.

Frances House, Inc. v. Illinois Department of Public Health

2015 IL App (1st) 140750 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 28, 2015

She testified that at the time of the R4 incident, she was employed as the qualified mental retardation [sic] professional (QMRP) at Kanthak. She began working there in April 2009. … A mixed question of law and fact is one “ ‘in which the historical facts are admitted or established, the rule of law is undisputed, and the issue is whether the facts satisfy the statutory standard.’ ” Parikh

Harvey Pre-school for Exceptional Children v. Bowling

85 Ill. App. 3d 1139 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 17, 1980

a party claiming an exemption has the burden to prove clearly and conclusively that he is entitled to the exemption.” … school population, although acknowledging that the statute does not provide public education for them, the School asserts that it is not necessary for a program to exactly mirror a program offered in a public school to qualify

In re Marriage of Howard

291 Ill. App. 3d 675 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 18, 1997

"In deciding whether a child 'lived’ in a particular State for purposes of determining whether that State qualifies as the child’s home State, a court must [examine not only] whether the child was physically in that State … When respondent sent the child to Illinois to attend Moose-heart, it was clearly not with the intent that David Macon remain in Illinois.

Bass v. Washington-Kinney Co.

119 Ill. App. 3d 713 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 18, 1983

The record establishes that at the time of the accident, Bass was employed by the Sovereign Hotel, 1040 West Granville, Chicago, as a building engineer. … In the present case, because the issue of damages was never reached by the jury, plaintiffs were clearly not prejudiced in any way.

People v. Adams

Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 17, 2010

Additionally, he claimed he was previously qualified as an expert in gunshot residue analysis in approximately a half-dozen Illinois counties. … Insofar as firearms were concerned, Hood possessed no certifications, but was qualified as an expert approximately 30 to 40 times.

Gallianetti v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ILL.

315 Ill. App. 3d 721 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 28, 2000

Accordingly, our inquiry now becomes whether claimant qualifies for a wage-differential award. … According to respondent, claimant has failed to establish his true earning capacity because he did not secure suitable employment within his restrictions.

Resurrection Lutheran Church v. Department of Revenue

212 Ill. App. 3d 964 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 19, 1991

Each individual claim for tax exemption must be determined from the facts presented, and the one claiming an exemption has the burden of proving clearly and conclusively that it is entitled to exempt status. … In order to qualify for a property tax exemption on charitable grounds, the taxpayer must show that the property was owned by a charitable organization and was exclusively used for charitable purposes.