Case law

Trapp v. Rockford Electric Co.

186 Ill. App. 379 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 15, 1914

O’Donnell, 221 Ill. 334 , the diligence required of the child was that which a reasonable person of his age should exercise, taking into consideration his age, capacity and discretion to avoid danger, which was qualified … It clearly appears that for a long time and perhaps for a year or more electricity had been passing down the hoisting wire and past the insulator to the end of the wire and that it had been common practice for a long time

People v. Risper

2020 IL App (1st) 160707 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 25, 2020

We agree with the State that such argument amounts to an attempt to admit such evidence based on Jillian’s “expert” knowledge of N.S. because she is her mother without having her qualified as an expert under … To rebut this presumption, a party challenging a statute must establish clearly that it violates the constitution. People v. Mosley, 2015 IL 115872, ¶ 22.

Arthur v. Lutheran General Hospital

Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 19, 1998

If the plaintiff fails to establish any element of the cause of action, summary judgment in favor of the defendant is proper. Flint v. Court Appointed Special Advocates of DuPage County, Inc. , 285 Ill. … The certificate shall indicate that the physician, qualified examiner, or clinical psychologist personally examined the respondent not more than 72 hours prior to admission ."

People v. L.W.

327 Ill. App. 3d 70 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 24, 2001

A judgment is against the manifest weight of the evidence only when an opposite conclusion is clearly apparent. In re C.N., 196 Ill. 2d 181, 208 (2001). … We find that the trial court did not err in determining that his education alone qualified him as an expert in psychology.

Allen v. Sarah Bush Lincoln Health Center

2021 IL App (4th) 200360 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 28, 2021

What you can’t see as clearly is that the spinal cord is actually covered by three different layers. Now the outside layer is called the dura. … We will not consider this complaint because it is clearly forfeited.

Englum v. City of Charleston

2017 IL App (4th) 160747 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 28, 2017

Englum’s eligibility based on his complaint for declaratory relief instead of allowing the City to determine eligibility under its procedural scheme and, alternatively, (2) concluding on the merits that Englum qualified … In May 2013, this court determined that the Board’s decision to deny Englum a line-of-duty pension was clearly erroneous. Englum, 2013 IL App (4th) 120982-U, ¶ 25. ¶ 11 C.

In re Marriage of Thomas

Appellate Court of Illinois · May 5, 2003

The settlement agreement established Paul's initial family support obligation at $800 per month. … Unless the contract clearly defines its terms, the court must give the contractual language its common and generally accepted meaning.

Board of Education of Community Consolidated School District No. 54 v. Spangler

Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 19, 2002

Spangler's teaching; (17) Not qualified to teach--"[T]his is a mixed bag." His letters do exhibit sarcasm and hostility, but these too do not squarely bear on his ability as a teacher." … If the legislature intended to leave any discretion or determination with the local board, it clearly would have said so. It did not.

Hernandez v. Paschen Contractors, Inc.

335 Ill. App. 3d 936 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 15, 2002

Clearly, Paschen had a contractual obligation to provide a safe worksite, and thus both sides were entitled to address whether the site was safe. … Thus, Paschen was entitled to try to establish that plaintiff was the sole proximate cause of his injury and not either a defective ladder or an unsafe site generally.

Nolan v. Elliott

179 Ill. App. 3d 1077 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 3, 1989

Plaintiff contends that this conduct, coupled with the fact that defendant began accelerating after he entered the intersection, clearly establishes defendant’s negligence as a matter of law. … The trial court disagreed, stating: “He’s testifying as to the standard and unless he’s a qualified expert, he can’t do that, and you haven’t disclosed him and then you can’t ask him those questions.”

People v. Calvin

116 Ill. App. 2d 471 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 18, 1969

The law attending the admissibility as evidence of dying declarations is firmly established in this State. In People v. … Clearly, the requirements for its admission as a dying declaration were not present.

People v. Kirchner

250 Ill. App. 3d 981 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 16, 1993

Clearly, the statutory scheme is ambiguous in regard to the status of one in Randy’s position when the presumption of parentage is rebutted. … Any formerly presumed father who might qualify under the law of other States as an “equitable parent” would benefit by remaining in a section 2 — 29 proceeding until all issues are resolved because he would have an opportunity

Rechenberg v. Illinois Workers' Compensation Comm'n

2018 IL App (2d) 170263WC · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 13, 2018

App. 3d 146, 151, 922 N.E.2d 1133, 1139 (2009)). ¶ 42 Here, the relevant underlying facts have not been “established” and are very much in dispute. … Izquierdo initially offered an opinion that causally related claimant’s right shoulder and arm condition to her work for the employer, he later significantly qualified that opinion both in his October 2014 letter

Goldberg v. Department of Professional Regulation

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 7, 2002

B) Constitutes a breach of the physician’s responsibility to a patient; C) Resulted in assumption by the physician of responsibility for delivery of patient care which the physician was not properly qualified or competent … Those articles would also be admissible for the limited purpose of establishing the basis of Dr. Goldberg’s professional opinion, if not his professional judgment.

Camco, Inc. v. Lowery

362 Ill. App. 3d 421 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 18, 2005

The public’s right to examine, inspect and review judicial records is clearly spelled out in section 16(6) of the Clerks of Courts Act. 705 ILCS 105/16(6) (West 2004). … Ct. 1230 (2002), establishes Cameo’s entitlement to a judgment as a matter of law.

Horsehead Corp. v. Dep't of Revenue & the Ill. Indep. Tax Tribunal

112 N.E.3d 646 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 24, 2018

We agree with IDOR that the clearly erroneous standard applies, as this case involves a mixed question of law and fact. See AFM Messenger Service, Inc. v. … The catalyst qualifies for the exemption.” 86 Ill. Adm. Code 130.330(c)(6)(A), (B) (2016).

United Airlines, Inc. v. Pappas

348 Ill. App. 3d 563 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 16, 2004

The trial court found Herman qualified as an expert in the field of real estate valuation. At trial, Herman described the methodology he used to appraise the property. … Taxpayer contends that this appeal presents a mixed question of law and fact, which requires application of the “clearly erroneous” standard of review.

Department of Transportation v. East Side Development, L. L. C.

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 31, 2008

Adams argues that the amendment clearly provides for separate compensation to owners of lawfully erected off-premises outdoor advertising signs. … It has been long established that the value of condemned property is considered as a whole, not the sum of its parts.

People v. Washington

256 Ill. App. 3d 445 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 1, 1993

According to the State, the Act provides relief for constitutional errors occurring at trial, for which newly discovered evidence does not qualify. … "Manifest error” means error which is "clearly evident, plain and indisputable.” Green, 218 Ill. App. 3d at 75 , citing People v. Sanders (1991), 209 Ill. App. 3d 366, 373 , 568 N.E.2d 200 .

Martin v. Care.com, Inc.

2025 IL App (1st) 250913-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 15, 2025

eligible and qualified in-home caregiver candidate for O.J … ¶ 29 This court has previously recognized that section 230(c)(1) does not grant blanket immunity to an interactive computer service provider from any civil cause of action that involves content posted