Case law

People v. Hayashi

386 Ill. App. 3d 113 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 30, 2008

Although the parties have not raised this issue, we point out that it is questionable whether this particular massage would qualify as a medical examination or procedure. … Because a contrary finding is not clearly apparent from the record, we will not disturb the trial court’s credibility findings.

Kellan v. Board of Trustees of the Firemen's Pension Fund

194 Ill. App. 3d 573 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 9, 1990

Spencer’s testimony clearly refutes that position. Second, the defendant says that the trial judge “gratuitously announced at the conclusion of his oral opinion that he concurred” in the Olson opinion. … (The plaintiff’s attorney correctly argued that the plaintiff was not qualified to give such an opinion.)

Savage v. Pho

Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 7, 2000

Pho's motion to dismiss, and in his memorandum in opposition to the motion, plaintiff stated that the matter was clearly an emergency motion, "one prompted by the press of the statute of limitations, permitted under Local … We find that plaintiff's motion for leave to amend reflected the materiality of the amendment and qualified as an emergency motion.

In re Nancy A.

Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 19, 2003

The first petition, which was filled out by Antonia, was legally insufficient, and clearly the State needed time within which to file a petition that contained legally sufficient allegations. … Turning to the case at bar, on January 31, 2002, the evidence established through clear and convincing evidence that respondent was mentally ill based upon the testimony of Dr.

Kahr v. Markland

187 Ill. App. 3d 603 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 24, 1989

The appellate court affirmed and noted that the evidence clearly established that First Chicago intended only to sell used furniture to the dealer. … The comment following section 2-403 of the UCC, referring to subsection (2), states: "This subsection extends protection to bona fide purchasers of goods who qualify as `buyers in the ordinary course of business' from a `

Secco v. Chicago Transit Authority

2 Ill. App. 2d 239 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 2, 1954

We are of the opinion that there is clearly a basis for such an interpretation. … They also held that the failure to elect the members in accordance with the statute would not invalidate the election establishing the School District. In People ex rel. Elder v. Quilici, 309 Ill.

People v. Brown

2026 IL App (3d) 240492-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 14, 2026

Actions that are considered matters of trial strategy are accorded great deference by the court and “are generally immune from claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.” People v. … Taking the contents of the defendant’s petition and attachments as true, he cannot establish that he was arguably prejudiced by this failure.

In re J.B.

2019 IL App (4th) 190537 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 22, 2020

However, respondent refused to participate in any of the services, indicating that he would do things only through Veteran Affairs (VA) because he believed they were the only ones qualified to work with him … -6-  A best-interest determination is against the manifest weight of the evidence only if the facts clearly demonstrate that the trial court should have

Goodrich Corp. v. Clark

Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 31, 2005

Goodrich argues if an order to produce an FOIA index is enough to qualify as an injunction, then any administrative or discovery order would qualify for an immediate interlocutory appeal. … This per se rule applies to the specific exemptions set forth in the subsections of section 7(1)(b) of the Act [citation], which pertains to '[i]nformation that, if disclosed, would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion

National Automobile Underwriters Ass'n v. Day

348 Ill. App. 554 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 12, 1953

Section 456 (3) of the Code is permissive only insofar as it permits fleet policies to be written or not to be written; if they are written in Illinois the definition contained therein is clearly mandatory. … Either group qualifies for the fleet rate under the statute.

Sohaey v. Van Cura

240 Ill. App. 3d 266 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 30, 1992

It is proper for a qualified expert to testify regarding a standard of care which is beyond the knowledge of the average person. Nolan v. Elliott (1989), 179 Ill. App. 3d 1077, 1086 . … Here, establishing the standard of care for real estate brokers was critical for plaintiffs.

Kuhn v. Owners Insurance Co.

235 N.E.3d 65 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 28, 2023

¶ 47 However, the Illinois Supreme Court has made clear that its suggestion that listing the limits of coverage multiple times in the declarations may create an ambiguity “should not be construed as ‘establishing … In Hobbs, the supreme court stated that listing a limit of liability for each vehicle could lead to an ambiguity “[i]n the absence of other qualifying language in the antistacking clause.” (Emphasis added.)

Loitz v. Remington Arms Co.

177 Ill. App. 3d 1034 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 30, 1988

App. 3d 409, 415 , 458 N.E.2d 530 ), was clearly the result of passion or prejudice (Ogg v. City of Springfield (1984), 121 Ill. … However, the term ‘excessive’ has never clearly been defined; it has merely been described.

People v. Schlemm

82 Ill. App. 3d 639 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 20, 1980

Clearly it would have enabled the landlord to reasonably believe that he had authority to do so. (See Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 , 177 n.14, 39 L. Ed. 2d 242 , 253 n.14, 94 S. Ct. 988 , 996 n.14.) … We do not agree that the concealment of a corpse could not be done in a manner to qualify as “exceptionally brutal or heinous behavior indicative of wanton cruelty'.”

People v. Brooks

2023 IL App (1st) 200435 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 25, 2023

“To overcome this 20 No. 1-20-0435 presumption, the party challenging the statute must clearly establish that it violates the constitution.” … Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), which interpreted the second amendment as establishing an individual right.

Pfister v. Shusta

256 Ill. App. 3d 186 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 27, 1994

Some commentators have observed that Nabozny may have established an ordinary negligence standard for participants of contact sports. … However, in common understanding, football, wrestling, and boxing, among others, are clearly recognized as contact sports.

People v. Viramontes

2021 IL App (1st) 190665 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 12, 2021

Effective assistance of counsel refers to competent, not perfect, representation, and “matters relating to trial strategy are generally immune from claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.” Id. … -9- ¶ 51 “The completeness doctrine permits a party to introduce the balance of an utterance or writing in order to explain, qualify or otherwise shed

Dodson v. Shaw

113 Ill. App. 3d 1063 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 22, 1983

A general verdict and a special interrogatory will not be found inconsistent except if they are clearly and absolutely irreconcilable. (Cohen v. Sager (1971), 2 Ill. App. 3d 1018, 1019 , 278 N.E.2d 453, 455 .) … William Landau, an eminently qualified neurologist, testified that plaintiff suffered from traumatic retrograde amnesia, the loss of memory of events leading up to a traumatic accident.

People v. Hatfield

72 Ill. App. 3d 249 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 10, 1979

For a statement to qualify as a spontaneous declaration, three elements must be present: (1) an occurrence sufficiently startling to produce a spontaneous and unreflecting statement; (2) absence of time to fabricate; and … With reference to the third factor listed above, Yuk’s statement, identifying the robbery offender, was clearly related to the circumstances of the occurrence.

Malacina v. Cook County Sheriff's Merit Board

458 Ill. Dec. 769 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 23, 2021

It is not our job to reweigh credibility decisions; we only ask if the “opposite conclusion” is “clearly evident.” Id. The opposite conclusion is not clearly evident here. … should no longer employ a deputy who would leave his gun unsecured in his car while drinking enough beers to be intoxicated, then later brandish that gun, threaten someone’s life with it, and claim an unlimited immunity