Case law

People v. Wilcox

33 Ill. App. 3d 432 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 6, 1975

It is also clearly established that where a conviction for rape depends upon the testimony of the complainant it must be clear and convincing or corroborated by other evidence. (People v. … Statements made by a prosecutrix at a time too remote to qualify as a spontaneous declaration are admissible over hearsay objection so long as proof of such statements is limited to the fact that the complaint was made and

Torres v. Midwest Development Co.

383 Ill. App. 3d 20 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 19, 2008

CAHILL, EJ., and GARCIA, J., concur. 1 On appeal, the parties argue extensively regarding whether Eiben was qualified to testify about roofing and its composition. … Despite the parties’ extensive arguments, we decline to address whether Eiben was qualified to testify regarding roofing and its composition for two reasons.

Hamer v. Board of Education

140 Ill. App. 3d 308 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 30, 1986

Plaintiff charged, inter alia, that the grade reduction policy (1) deprived her of rights guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment; (2) violated the privileges and immunities clause of the fourteenth amendment; (3) inflicted … Inasmuch as we are not concerned with any first amendment rights, Bigelow clearly has no application in the case at bar.

People v. Deloney

341 Ill. App. 3d 621 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 30, 2003

In addition, we note that even if the letter could qualify as “new,” it is not of such a conclusive nature that it would likely change the outcome at trial and it would only bear on the sufficiency of the evidence. … Decisions on what evidence to present and which witnesses to call on a defendant’s behalf rest with trial counsel and, as matters of trial strategy, are generally immune from claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.

People v. Garlick

46 Ill. App. 3d 216 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 17, 1977

Clearly, such out-of-court statements would not be hearsay. … The establishment of presumptions and rules respecting the burden of proof is clearly within the domain of State governments. James-Dickinson Farm Mortgage Co. v.

City of Hurst v. Illinois Commerce Commission

120 Ill. App. 3d 354 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 23, 1983

“Orders of the commission are entitled to great weight, for they arise out of the deliberations of its members, who are much better qualified to interpret the testimony and charts of specialists and technicians. … As such, it is a precise historical figure that once having been established is not subject to change.

People v. Ogurek

356 Ill. App. 3d 429 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 30, 2005

In sum, defendant has made no attempt to establish that he was prejudiced by the trial court’s alleged failure to inquire into his desire for substitute counsel, and it is unlikely that he could. … Such a request is clearly untimely. See People v. Friedman, 79 Ill. 2d 341, 348 (1980). In short, defendant was in a predicament of his own making.

People v. Baxtrom

61 Ill. App. 3d 546 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 12, 1978

Hoffman, joined by Sturgeon, then moved to withdraw as counsel for Lofton and defendant, stating: “We have my office representing all three co-defendants, one being given immunity to testify against the other two.” … The requested information was clearly evidence favorable to defendant, particularly in light of his defense theory that Lofton and Washington committed the armed robbery and that Lofton, not he, had shot Stanley Hodges.

People Ex Rel. Gasparas v. Village of Justice

88 Ill. App. 2d 227 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 16, 1967

of the Village of Justice on July 28th, 1965 and on August 10th, 1965 and at all times between said dates, and were not full-time members of the Police Department of the Village of Justice, Illinois, and therefore do not qualify … asserts that neither the provisions of Chapter 24 nor any of the cases cited by plaintiff contain anything which would make part-time appointments of police officers illegal, and that “in 1965 the legislature saw fit to clearly

Wright v. City of Danville

267 Ill. App. 3d 375 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 20, 1994

Conduct clearly is within the scope of employment even though done in part to serve the purposes of the employee. (Pyne v. … The conviction in that case did not establish conclusively that probable cause existed, but was only prima facie evidence of probable cause.

People v. Smith

253 Ill. App. 3d 443 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 6, 1993

The defendant, a waitress at the establishment, was charged on June 5,1990, with one count of arson. … App. 3d 787, 794 , for the proposition that when evidence is intentionally destroyed, it is not necessary to establish that the defense was prejudiced by the missing evidence.

Beasley v. Abusief

146 Ill. App. 3d 54 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 5, 1986

He informed her of the necessity of obtaining a favorable opinion of a medical expert in order to establish negligence on the part of defendant. Upon being retained, Garrison promptly wrote Dr. … Holding that the limitation period is not triggered until a prospective malpractice plaintiff secures an expert witness qualified to testify to the described necessary elements for a prima facie case would clearly extend

Village of Riverdale v. Allied Waste Transportation, Inc.

334 Ill. App. 3d 224 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 27, 2002

In the present case, the record clearly established that defendants’ activities on the property in question constituted the operation of a wood recycling, waste storage, or waste disposal facility. … The record established that following the fires on the property, defendants agreed to cease operations on October 23, 2000.

Flynn v. Henkel

307 Ill. Dec. 386 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 27, 2006

According to Rita, things were fine until Cory sought to establish his paternity. At that point, Alice terminated Cindy's visitation. … These instances included required testing for phenylketonuria at birth, required immunization for diphtheria, required hearing and visual examinations, and prohibited child labor.

People v. Morez

2022 IL App (3d) 190425-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 17, 2022

See Harris, 2015 IL App (4th) 140696, ¶ 51 (warnings on the signed form clearly indicated a choice between consenting to testing and withdrawing consent to testing). … Johnson testified that the State granted him use immunity.

People v. Travis

170 Ill. App. 3d 873 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 21, 1988

The record clearly established defendant was repeatedly advised of his rights and repeatedly waived them. … Here the jury received the instruction requiring unanimous verdicts, and it was also polled concerning the verdict, clearly establishing the verdict was unanimous.

Dyer v. American Family Insurance Co.

159 Ill. App. 3d 766 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 25, 1987

On the date of the kidnapping plaintiff was residing with her father and qualified as an insured under the terms of his policy with defendant. … We draw the parties’ attention to the fact that the statute establishing uninsured motorist coverage (Ill. Rev.

People v. Allen

288 Ill. App. 3d 502 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 2, 1997

However, words need only be likely to incite violence, not actually produce violence, to qualify as fighting words. See People of the City of Pontiac v. Klein, 67 Mich. … We reverse defendant’s conviction on count V because the evidence failed to establish where or when the conduct underlying count V occurred.

Schnitker v. Springfield Urban League, Inc.

409 Ill. Dec. 371 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 22, 2016

must prove five things by a preponderance of the evidence: First, that Plaintiff is Caucasian [non-Pentecostal]; Second, that Plaintiff applied for and was qualified … -9- ¶ 35 Even if the trial court errs by giving an improper instruction, a reviewing court will ordinarily not reverse the trial court unless the instruction “clearly

Webb v. Financial Industry Regulatory Authority

2022 IL App (1st) 200854-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 14, 2022

This falls squarely within the established arbitral immunity.” … However, it is well-established in our jurisprudence that a legally cognizable immunity may prevent a litigant from suing certain parties in certain situations.