Case law

Cork v. Associated International Insurance Managers, Inc.

58 Ill. App. 2d 331 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 26, 1965

Subsection (1), section 121, clearly states that “this subsection shall not apply to contracts procured by agents under the authority of section 445. . . .” … The bank account established by defendant in its own name carried an additional title designation of “British Commercial Account.”

The Northern League of Professional Baseball Teams v. Del Giudice

2018 IL App (1st) 172407 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 16, 2019

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in qualifying them to testify as expert witnesses. ¶ 61 E. … “It is well established that the failure to object at trial to an asserted error in jury instructions waives the question.”

Cleveringa v. J.I. Case Co.

230 Ill. App. 3d 831 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 12, 1992

This claim was clearly contingent upon the outcome of the original action between plaintiff and McLaughlin. … Consequently, Rees did not have the necessary skill or expertise to qualify as an expert in the manufacture or design of the maxi-sneaker.

Stone Street Partners, LLC v. The City of Chicago Department of Administrative Hearings

2014 IL App (1st) 123654 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 12, 2014

Nonetheless, the 1999 order mentions nothing about default, and it was clearly entered after some sort of adjudication on the merits. … The City moved to dismiss the both because it was as time-barred and because section 2- 107 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act immunizes it from liability for libel and slander.

Timm v. Indian Springs Recreation Ass'n

226 Ill. App. 3d 760 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 19, 1992

Evidence at trial established the following facts surrounding plaintiff’s injury. Plaintiff was golfing with Cochran and two others in a women’s golf league on the premises of Indian Springs. … Plaintiff’s failure to draft the proposed count in a manner that clearly referenced section 388 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts clearly vindicates the court’s inability to perceive its subtle significance.

Nowak v. City of Country Club Hills

406 Ill. App. 3d 837 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 27, 2010

The record establishes the following undisputed facts. … Section 1(d) of the PEDA provides that a disabled employee receiving salary benefits under that statute “shall not be entitled to any benefits for which he would qualify because of his disability under the provisions of the

People v. Hayes

159 Ill. App. 3d 1048 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 18, 1987

The court noted the State’s indication in conference that the crimes were heinous and brutal, thus qualifying for extended term and a sentence of up to 60 years’ imprisonment. … Here, the provision for a staffer sentence if defendant failed to appear became an integral part of the plea agreement, was clearly communicated to and understood by defendant at the time of the plea, compensated for defendant

In re Marriage of Benson

2015 IL App (4th) 140682 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 10, 2015

Nancy stated she had attempted to file a qualified Illinois domestic relations order (QILDRO) but had been unable to do so. … Plaintiff’s exhibit No. 5, entitled “Firefighter’s Pension Plan Description,” clearly states benefits through the plan include both retirement and disability benefits for its participants.

Chand v. Patla

Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 6, 2003

App. 3d at 984 (the argument that an attorney fee award was barred by sovereign immunity was devoid of merit). We therefore affirm that part of the circuit court's judgment relating to the requested medical records. … The ALJ's conclusions were not clearly erroneous. See City of Belvidere , 181 Ill. 2d at 205 .

Honeywell International, Inc. v. The Department of Revenue of the State of IL.

Appellate Court of Illinois · May 5, 2006

Accordingly, we apply the clearly erroneous standard of review. … AThe detention and control, or the manual or ideal custody, of anything which may be the subject of property, for one=s use and enjoyment, either as owner or as the proprietor of a qualified

Williams v. City of Chicago

371 Ill. App. 3d 105 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 12, 2007

Defendant's duty is limited by section 3-102(a) of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act), which provides: "[A] local public entity has the duty to exercise … Clearly, the defendant intended that plaintiff cross at the crosswalk, walk along the sidewalk toward her car, then step onto the curb and into the car.

People v. Mazzone

52 Ill. App. 3d 859 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 13, 1977

Clearly, “The final Report of the President’s Commission on Obscenity and Pornography (1970)” is an eminent and recognized work in this field. … Just as a qualified expert in a malpractice case may testify as to whether the actions engaged by the defendant comply with the standards of the medical profession, so to can a qualified expert in the realm of obscenity testify

O'Keefe v. Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc.

2020 IL App (5th) 190448 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 31, 2020

On June 5, 2020, this court entered an order requiring that the defendant file a response to the petition for rehearing and establishing a deadline for the plaintiff’s reply. … NIST is a division of the United States Department of Commerce, which clearly qualifies as a “regulatory body.”

Wadden v. Village of Woodridge

193 Ill. App. 3d 231 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 16, 1990

Summary judgment is a drastic measure, to be granted only where the evidence construed most strongly against the moving party establishes clearly and strongly and without doubt the right thereto. (Becovic v. … We are of the opinion that the evidence before the trial court clearly established that the position of golf professional was abolished rather than replaced by the position of administrative assistant as argued by Wadden.

People v. Thornton

250 N.E.3d 991 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 12, 2024

The State provided him with use immunity for his testimony at trial. … At the time, Davis did not qualify his statement by claiming he did not remember what happened, that he was using drugs, or that he was asleep.

W. F. Smith & Co. v. Lowenstein

4 Ill. App. 3d 153 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 17, 1972

We do not think any of this testimony establishes either unequivocal or unconditional agreement by the defendants. … On the contrary, we think that the testimony of the defendants, as set out earlier, clearly establishes that not only was there no biding agreement, but that the defendants expressly made the existence of any binding agreement

Pope v. Alberto-Culver Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 27, 1998

It is well established that a product or service that is within the realm of general skills and knowledge in the industry cannot be a trade secret. Web Communications Group, Inc. v. Gateway 2000, Inc. , 889 F. … Defendant company clearly had the knowledge, personnel and resources to identify the "niche market" referred to by plaintiff.

Northern Trust Co. v. County of Lake

Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 4, 2004

In interpreting a statute, it is never proper for a court to depart from the plain language by reading into the statute exceptions, limitations, or conditions that conflict with the clearly expressed legislative intent. … In this case, the parties agree that the zoning officer was charged with determining whether the facility qualifies as a permitted accessory use under Lake County's zoning scheme.

Stone v. Industrial Commission

286 Ill. App. 3d 174 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 10, 1997

Boyd found it difficult to establish a rapport with claimant as "[he] presented] himself in a very unresponsive manner” with a "very flat affect and responded] to all questions with a minimum of information.” … Claimant expressed no interest in several positions for which he was qualified and which conformed to his doctor’s restrictions.

O'Keefe v. Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc.

2020 IL App (5th) 190448 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 31, 2020

On June 5, 2020, this court entered an order requiring that the defendant file a response to the petition for rehearing and establishing a deadline for the plaintiff’s reply. … 2018). 6 Department of Commerce, which clearly qualifies as a “regulatory body.”