Case law

Dipietro v. GATX Corp.

2020 IL App (1st) 192196 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 27, 2021

for his or her activities, and (3) the discharge violates clearly mandated public policy. … Instead, she attempts to qualify some of them as occurring early in her employment or to minimize the severity or frequency of the issues.

Rochester Buckhart Action Group v. Young

Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 14, 2008

"To establish entitlement to a prelimi- nary injunctive relief, the plaintiff must demonstrate (1) a clearly ascertainable right that needs protection; (2) irreparable harm … The notice and processing requirements differ greatly depending on whether the proposed construction qualifies as a "new" facility.

Grassroots Collaborative v. City of Chicago

2020 IL App (1st) 192099 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 15, 2020

Even accepting these allegations as true, as we must, we do not believe that they establish plaintiffs’ standing under the holding of Havens. … I think this statement clearly constitutes a request for leave to amend if the trial court concluded (as it did) that the allegations in plaintiffs’ complaint - 23 - No.

Giampa v. Illinois Civil Service Commission

89 Ill. App. 3d 606 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 6, 1980

The second charge, set out above, was found by the circuit court to establish a basis for plaintiff's discharge. … is required to supplant the privilege' and may not be required to `waive such immunity.'

Hynes v. Snyder

Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 2, 2005

The problem with that conclusion is that there is no statute to support it; yet a statute is clearly a necessary part of a statute of limitations. … Thus, even assuming the Director had established an unreasonable delay, his laches argument would still fail.

Huggins v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago

2024 IL App (1st) 230615-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 11, 2024

under the Tort Immunity Act … Brooks, 2014 IL App (4th) 130503, ¶¶ 40, 42 (general allegations of a failure to supervise student activities do not establish willful and wanton conduct for purposes of section 3- 108 of the Tort Immunity Act).

People v. Winfield

160 Ill. App. 3d 983 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 8, 1987

After being qualified as a witness, C.B., a seven-year-old at the time of trial, testified that she had lived in a one-bedroom apartment with Winfield, her mother, and her sister. … An excerpt from McCormick is also instructive: “The statement need not have been made to a physician; one made to a hospital attendant, ambulance driver, or member of the family may qualify.”

People v. Partin

468 Ill. Dec. 722 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 2, 2022

“Findings are against the manifest weight of the evidence when they are unreasonable, arbitrary, or not based on the evidence or when the opposite conclusion is clearly evident.” Id. … There was no evidence that the police were aware that defendant called Nicole, much less that she was qualified to remove the truck.

People v. Guerrero

2020 IL App (1st) 172156 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 5, 2020

at bar, the prosecutor did not call the expert “trash” or label her testimony “babble” or “ridiculous,” although he did point out her own memory lapses and criticized the substance of her testimony, clearly … She testified that she had never been found not qualified but there were “times my testimony wasn’t allowed to be presented.”

Dunne v. County of Cook

123 Ill. App. 3d 468 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 12, 1984

In light of these distinctions, the majority’s analogy of Pechous to the instant case is clearly baseless. … Cook County has a constitutionally established county executive form of government. (Ill. Const. 1970, art. VII, sec. 6(b).)

Lurie v. Rupe

51 Ill. App. 2d 164 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 14, 1964

(supra) a New York publisher used an independent Illinois printing company solely to qualify with the postal department for mailing second class matter. … This established a sufficient cause of action against the trustees.

SmileDirectClub, LLC v. Delta Dental Plans Ass'n

2022 IL App (1st) 220208-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 8, 2022

¶ 37 Defamatory statements may not be actionable if immunized by an absolute privilege (Layne v. Builders Plumbing Supply Co., 210 Ill. … In the instant case, the insureds (i.e., the person to whom the matter is published) clearly have an interest in learning the reasons for the denial of their claims.

People v. Reid

174 Ill. App. 3d 1009 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 3, 1988

The jury manifested its confusion in this case when it asked the question, and the legal issue is clearly pertinent to this case. … The State contends that evidence regarding the jury deliberations establishes that the error did not prejudice defendant.

Adams v. American International Group, Inc.

339 Ill. App. 3d 669 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 11, 2003

Thus, because the release does not create the debtor/creditor relationship, it does not qualify as an instrument of writing under section 2 of the Interest Act. … The unjust enrichment claim clearly arises out of the settlement agreement that governs the payment of the settlement proceeds.

Wigoda v. Cousins

14 Ill. App. 3d 460 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 12, 1973

McWeeney, in which no statute was in issue, most clearly states: “The general rule is well established that the judicial department of the government has no right to interfere with or attempt to control a citizen in the exercise … Stat, ch. 146, § 8) clearly states: “§ 8. Neither party shall have more than one change of venue.”

Gilbert v. Frank

233 Ill. App. 3d 372 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 28, 1992

First, I agree with the plaintiff that an issue of material fact exists because the consent form formulated by the hospital clearly states that the physician is an employee of the hospital. … To immunize the hospital under the alleged facts herein is taking a step backwards, in my mind, rather than taking a step at all in allowing an individual or entity to escape liability for its own “misrepresentations” of

People v. Brexton

982 N.E.2d 250 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 28, 2012

The defendant has the burden of establishing a violation of his or her speedy-trial rights. People v. Higgenbotham, 2012 IL App (1st) 110434, ¶ 16. … Defendant asserts that his pro se motions leading up to the February 12 hearing clearly demonstrated that he wished to preserve his right to a speedy trial. ¶ 16 Defendant further points out that the

KEY OUTDOOR, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees

322 Ill. App. 3d 316 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 2, 2001

Moreover, any claim for compensation from IDOT is necessarily a claim against the State and is barred by sovereign immunity. Village of Riverwoods v. BG Ltd. Partnership, 276 Ill. … An administrative agency’s factual determinations are against the manifest weight of the evidence where the opposite conclusion is clearly evident. City of Belvidere v.

Told v. Madison Building Co.

216 Ill. App. 29 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 2, 1919

under all counts of plaintiff’s declaration a recovery was not sought on the theory that she was a licensee but on the theory that defendant owed her the duty to exercise ordinary care for her safety; that the proof did not establish … It is true the witness said ‘ extremely probable, ’ ’ but that statement was immediately thereafter qualified.

People v. Flowers

306 Ill. App. 3d 259 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 14, 1999

Established Illinois law clearly permits impeachment by prior conviction by the admission of a certified copy of the prior conviction into evidence. People v. Nelson, 275 Ill. … However, Talarico qualified his recollection on this point by acknowledging that the events occurred “two years ago.”