Case law

Marxmiller v. Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District

2017 IL App (4th) 160741 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 5, 2018

Defendant’s negligence and the proximately resulting injuries were established by the court’s summary determinations, not by defendant’s admissions. … In this case, clearly there is evidence to support pain and suffering[,] and clearly there is evidence to support emotional distress.

O'Connell v. County of Cook

451 Ill. Dec. 852 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 30, 2021

(West 2018)) establishes a pension system for Cook County employees. Several sections in article 9 of the Code are relevant to this appeal. … As noted above, the board halted O’Connell’s benefits when the county terminated him, before his disability benefit period expired and thus before he was able to qualify for either the early annuity option or

Stone v. Paddock Publications, Inc.

356 Ill. Dec. 284 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 17, 2011

Doe also contends that the challenged comments were immunized by the Citizen Participation Act (735 ILCS 110/1 (West 2008)). We reverse. ¶ 2 I. … Do some of your own research on your wonderful candidate and you'll quickly discover that she is NOT QUALIFIED to be a trustee.

People v. Adams

102 Ill. App. 3d 1129 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 21, 1981

The rebuttal testimony of Sheriff Brooks and the argument of the State’s Attorney, however, clearly combine to violate the Doyle doctrine. … This witness had not personally conducted the tests in question, nor was he asked whether he was qualified by training or experience to give the opinions sought from him by defendant.

People v. Stitts

2020 IL App (1st) 171723 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 6, 2020

Vasselli turned on his flashlight, walked over to where the object had fallen, and “could clearly see that it was a handgun.” … ¶ 29 More substantively, the State argues that Stitts forfeited this argument (which he admits) and he cannot establish plain error because the evidence was overwhelming.

People v. Montanez

463 Ill. Dec. 573 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 9, 2022

This statement is clearly a reference to the police report because the report is the subject of the entirety of defendant’s first claim. … ¶ 55 The vast majority of our cases have drawn a bright line at 21 years old in determining who qualifies as a “young adult offender.” For example, in People v.

Niles Township High School District 219 v. Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board

Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 15, 2008

Standard of Review “[T]he Board’s determination as to whether the facts establish that an employee is a confidential employee as defined by statute will not be reversed, unless that determination was clearly erroneous … Thus, both cases were affirmations, based on a clearly erroneous standard of review.

People v. Davenport

Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 30, 1998

In this case, Clemons does not dispute that Officer Bloore's testimony qualifies as expert. … However, the State should not conclude that our decision today approves of the way in which these cases were prosecuted or establishes a precedent for less compelling cases.

In re Manual M.

2017 IL App (1st) 162381 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 6, 2017

. ¶ 18 Illinois recognizes a qualified privilege from disclosing secret surveillance locations in a criminal proceeding against the target of the surveillance. People v. Price, 404 Ill. … The State can satisfy its initial burden by establishing that the surveillance location was located on private property with the permission of the owner or in a useful location which would be compromised by

People v. Jessica M.

385 Ill. App. 3d 894 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 17, 2008

By its terms, section 5 — 4—3(f) (iii) clearly manifests the legislative purpose delineated in the indexing statute. … Clearly, the statute limits the use of its single DNA database to the purposes set forth in the enactment.

Kern v. UREGAS SERVICE OF W. FRANKFORT

90 Ill. App. 3d 182 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 29, 1980

The Department, having more expertise in this highly technical area, is more qualified to determine what regulation is necessary, and the court should refrain from invalidating the regulations unless they are clearly arbitrary … Although the evidence at trial established that the regulator was not properly installed or protected, Mr.

Garner v. City of Chicago

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 30, 2001

We note that this proposition has been qualified to exclude officer's conduct that, "was entirely in pursuit of personal goals." Wolf v. Liberis , 153 Ill. App. 3d 488, 493 , 505 N.E.2d 1202 (1987). … This section clearly delegates the determination of whether or not the injury occurred "in the performance of his duty" to the Board, not the Superintendent.

People Ex Rel. Hatch v. Elrod

190 Ill. App. 3d 1004 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 4, 1989

The decedent’s statement to Officer Morrison as he was being wheeled into the emergency room of the hospital clearly met two of the three aforementioned criteria. … Defendant’s next argument is that the State failed to establish that he committed the offense of armed robbery.

Hallmark & Johnson Properties, Ltd. v. Taylor

201 Ill. App. 3d 512 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 13, 1990

Rotheimer’s attorney also sent a letter on April 18, 1985, to Terrance Honan, the listing broker for Hallmark & Johnson, which stated that “Taylor was not a competent and qualified buyer” and that suit would be filed against … The document bears the date May 3, 1985, but the letter to Taylor’s attorney from Rotheimer’s attorney and dated June 10, 1985 (exhibit 9 to Rotheimer’s deposition), clearly reflects that as of that date, only Rotheimer had

Slocum v. The Board of Trustees of the State Universities Retirement System

2013 IL App (1st) 130182 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 14, 2014

Plaintiffs argue the clearly erroneous standard applies, while defendants argue the manifest-weight-of-the-evidence standard applies. … Thereafter, SURS denied plaintiffs’ applications. ¶ 43 The evidence in this case indicates plaintiffs were denied the opportunity to purchase service credit in the late 1990s because they did not qualify

Flaherty v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund

311 Ill. App. 3d 62 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 30, 1999

As a result, the Board found that plaintiff did not qualify for duty disability benefits but was instead entitled to ordinary disability benefits. … The decision of an administrative agency is against the manifest weight of the evidence only if the opposite conclusion is clearly evident. Abrahamson v.

In re Marriage of Baumgartner

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 30, 2008

App. 3d 105, 579 N.E.2d 6 (1991) wherein the court stated, "'[c]ourts have no power to delegate any of their duties unless clearly authorized by law.'" Stribling, 219 Ill. App. 3d at 109, quoting Smallwood v. … It does not expressly qualify under the guidelines set forth in [the California statute], nor do such loans share similar features with those specifically enumerated items designated to qualify as income.

People v. Bleitner

199 Ill. App. 3d 146 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 27, 1990

Moreover, even though the plea had already been accepted, facts disclosed at the sentencing hearing can be considered in determining whether an adequate factual basis for the plea has been established. People v. … Clearly, the trial court did not consider these factors in sentencing defendant. When taken in context, these statements are merely responses to an erroneous argument raised by defense counsel.

Needy v. Sparks

51 Ill. App. 3d 350 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 1, 1977

Clearly, then, defendant’s contention of prejudicial error in this regard is without merit. … Thus, the trial court clearly did not err in refusing to direct a verdict for defendant.

International Harvester Credit Corp. v. Helland

151 Ill. App. 3d 848 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 10, 1986

Illinois courts in similar circumstances have concluded that a document produced by one party which is retained in the records of a second party does not qualify as a business record of the second party. (Pell v. … Specifically, IHCC contends (1) the trial court did not apply the correct measure of damages and (2) the award is excessive, clearly disproportionate, and oppressive.