Case law

Midwest Generation, LLC v. Illinois Pollution Control Board

2024 IL App (4th) 210304 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 14, 2024

Accordingly, a dry surface impoundment that was designed to hold liquid but no longer holds liquid first qualifies as a “CCR surface impoundment” by virtue of its design and next qualifies as an “inactive CCR surface impoundment … The legislature clearly expressed its intent through the plain language it utilized in the Act.

People v. Ross

329 Ill. App. 3d 872 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 29, 2002

The trial court’s finding that the State’s reasons were race neutral was not clearly erroneous under these facts. … Hannah first argues that, since the letter is not an admission of guilt, it does not qualify as an admission against interest. This argument is unpersuasive.

Veazey v. Rich Township High School District 227

59 N.E.3d 857 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 20, 2016

But the Review Law is an exclusive method of review limited to specific cases and the areas of its applicability must be clearly defined. Chestnut v. Lodge, 34 Ill. … employee or a Board member is ineligible to be hired by the District unless there are no other qualified applicants for the position.

Graham v. Lakeview Pantry

2019 IL App (1st) 182003 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 27, 2020

Hougan thus held that the lessee store was immune from the premises liability action. 2013 IL App (2d) 130270, ¶ 44. ¶ 24 As in Hougan, the lease terms in this case dictate liability. … In this case, Lakeview Pantry’s lease’s section 10(a) clearly states that the landlord is responsible for all structural repairs, supporting Lakeview Pantry’s proposition that it did not control the area where

People v. Brexton - Modified upon Denial of Rehearing

Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 19, 2003

App. 3d 937, 951 (1986), a defendant charged with escape under section 31--6(c) argued that the police never established "custody." … The escape statute clearly does not intend such a result. Accordingly, we reject the view advanced in Janis .

People v. Olsson

2014 IL App (2d) 131217 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 18, 2014

The report clearly stated that the Department was not able to provide a plan because defendant was unwilling to cooperate. … Olsson, 2011 IL App (2d) 091351, ¶ 4 (“If the evidence presented at a discharge hearing is sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt, no conviction results; instead, the defendant is found ‘not not guilty

Chandler v. American General Finance, Inc.

329 Ill. App. 3d 729 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 27, 2002

A cause of action will not be dismissed on the pleadings unless it clearly appears no set of facts can be proved which will entitle the plaintiff to recover. Bryson v. … In Jackson, the supreme court held: “We also agree with the appellate court that application of Lanier to this case does not confer a blanket immunization of assignees from liability under the Consumer Fraud Act.

Bellow v. Bellow

94 Ill. App. 3d 361 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 19, 1981

We would then be faced with the problem of establishing certain criteria for the justification of a given multiplier. … That is clearly an undesirable spectre.

Riggs v. Woman to Woman, Obstetrics & Gynecology, P.C.

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 8, 2004

Clearly, there is a difference. … Defendant asserts that its inadvertent failure to register should not excuse plaintiff from performing under the agreement and that the relevant policy considerations clearly establish that the trial court's punishment did

O'DONNELL v. Field Enterprises, Inc.

145 Ill. App. 3d 1032 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 26, 1986

It follows that defendants’ documents and affidavit in support of their motions to dismiss are being used not to establish a factual defense, but rather, to establish the existence of an affirmative defense as a matter of … Thus, it has long been the rule that in an action for libel, the words alleged to be defamatory must be set forth clearly and with particularity. (Wilson v. Hunk (1977), 51 Ill.

Tully v. McLean

409 Ill. App. 3d 659 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 26, 2011

LPDA was a company established by McLean to hold trusts he established for his children. The children’s trusts owned 99% of LPDA. McLean owned the other 1% and managed LPDA. … With regard to the fifth factor, it found it “clearly established that the harm incurred was the result of intentional malice, trickery or deceit.”

People v. Gunn

2019 IL App (1st) 170542 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 30, 2020

Matters of trial strategy are generally immune from claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. … As we noted above, matters of trial strategy are generally immune from claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.

People v. Bivens

163 Ill. App. 3d 472 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 13, 1987

Despite the detriment the comment may have been to the defendant, the comment was clearly based on evidence and was therefore proper. … Stat. 1985, ch. 38, par. 9—1(f)), that “the burden of proof of establishing the existence of any of the factors set forth in subsection (b) is on the State and shall not be satisfied unless established beyond a reasonable

Hiscott v. Peters

Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 16, 2001

A reviewing court will not disturb the trial court's decision unless it clearly abused its discretion. Gill v. Foster , 157 Ill. 2d 304, 312-13 (1993). … established with a sense of objectivity.

Magee v. Garreau

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 30, 2002

In his highly qualified statement in his affidavit, Russell merely stated that he "never received any notification that he [Magee] did not understand the agreement to be stated above." … Defense counsel argued that the parties had an enforceable settlement agreement when the undisputed facts clearly revealed no meeting of the minds.

Guardado v. Navarro

47 Ill. App. 2d 92 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 13, 1964

Defendants contend on this appeal that plaintiffs were guilty of complicity as willing participants in a drinking party -which led to the intoxication of the driver, and thus do not qualify in the category of innocent parties … The question of complicity was a vital one, clearly raised by the evidence. It was the duty of the trial court to instruct the jury on the legal effects of plaintiffs’ participation in the drinking.

Sampson v. Cape Industries Ltd.

185 Ill. App. 3d 83 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 28, 1989

Clearly, Zurich had the power to cut off subsequent garnishment claims by exhausting the policy limits before those claims were reduced to judgment against an insured and before a service of garnishment summons on it. … That decision also refutes any contention that uncertainty in regard to whether Cape qualifies as an insured here would make plaintiff’s claim against Zurich too contingent to permit a garnishment suit or to create any priority

Prevendar v. Thonn

166 Ill. App. 3d 30 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 5, 1988

After extensive voir dire, the court determined that plaintiffs had not adequately qualified Ball as an expert. … Thus, procedural statutes are clearly to be given retroactive application.

Winston v. City of Chicago

2019 IL App (1st) 181419 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 16, 2019

the Act has the burden of proving that immunity. … Some situations will be so benign as to clearly be, as a matter of law, below the theoretical minimum for willful and wanton conduct.

McCarty v. Weatherford

362 Ill. App. 3d 308 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 4, 2005

.; Lynn Crites, Individually; Esther Lausen, Individually; and Raynor Hotel Company, a Delaware Corporation Qualified in Illinois, Defendants-Appellees, and Holiday Inns, Inc., a Tennessee Corporation Qualified in Illinois … We clearly do. We should require compliance with supreme court rules so that cases may be decided fairly and on their merits.