Case law

People v. Evans

2017 IL App (1st) 143268 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 18, 2017

Indeed, it is well-established that sufficiency of the State’s evidence is not a proper issue for a postconviction proceeding. Id. at 638. … Finding the exclusion of the witness to be an abuse of discretion, the court in Lane noted that the alibi witness that had been permitted to testify had been “clearly discredited” because he admitted to being

Hall v. Country Casualty Insurance

204 Ill. App. 3d 765 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 24, 1990

The court also found that the 1965 Ford Mustang was not a covered auto under Walters’ Country Casualty policy and did not qualify for coverage under that policy as a trailer. … The insured’s intention in acquiring the vehicle, although clearly relevant, is not the sole determinant, nor is the operability of the named insured vehicle. United Farm Bureau, 86 Ill. 2d at 345-46 .

Federal Marine Terminals, Inc. v. Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission

371 Ill. App. 3d 1117 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 6, 2007

Conversely, an employee is not entitled to total and permanent disability compensation if he is qualified for and capable of obtaining gainful employment without serious risk to his health or life. [Citation.] … The Commission’s finding that the claimant is permanently and totally disabled is supported by competent evidence, and an opposite conclusion is not clearly apparent.

Castro v. Brown's Chicken & Pasta, Inc.

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 15, 2000

Clearly, there is no legal duty on the part of Brown's because no special relationship exists between it and plaintiff. … This qualified common law privilege applies both to tangible evidence and oral testimony. Daniels , 240 Ill. App. 3d at 331 , 607 N.E.2d at 1266 .

Wasteland, Inc. v. Pollution Control Board

118 Ill. App. 3d 1041 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 21, 1983

Over objection by Wasteland’s counsel, the reports were received, the hearing officer ruling that they qualified under the hearsay exception, as past recollections recorded and business records. … The landfill herein was granted a permit for those wastes, while the record clearly demonstrates that large amounts of paper, cardboard and garbage were accepted.

Bank of America v. 108 N. State LLC

Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 31, 2010

The letter agreements, beginning in March 2008, clearly state that the loan was not in balance and that this constitutes an “event of default” under the loan documents. … All of these actions, defendants allege, are evidence that Hollan and CBRE are not qualified to act as a receiver for the project. We disagree.

Clair v. Village of Hanover Park

2021 IL App (1st) 190515-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 17, 2021

Mixed questions are those in which the historical facts are admitted or established, the rule of law is undisputed, and the question is whether those facts satisfy the … An agency’s decision is clearly erroneous when we are left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Id.

Dooley v. Darling

26 Ill. App. 3d 342 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 17, 1975

While the plaintiff had the burden of establishing plaintiff’s decedent’s freedom from contributory negligence (Storm v. … Defendant Gregus also contends that the trial court erred in giving plaintiffs instruction No. 12 without, at least, qualifying said instruction with his instructions No. 2, No. 3, No. 4, No. 5, or No. 6.

Kazmi v. The Department of Financial and Professional Regulation

19 N.E.3d 126 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 10, 2014

to put it another way, whether the rule of law as applied to the established facts is or is not violated.” … Citrano is further distinguishable because the appellant in that case was, in fact, qualified to obtain a barber’s license, while Dr. Kazmi was not qualified to obtain a medical license. In fact, Dr.

People v. Webber

2014 IL App (2d) 130101 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 3, 2014

The Secretary is not required to issue a license to everyone who applies; the Secretary shall issue a license “to every qualifying applicant.” (Emphasis added.) 625 ILCS 5/6-110(a) (West 2012). … - 15 - 2014 IL App (2d) 130101 that the law will develop in a ‘principled, intelligent fashion,’ immune from erratic changes.”6 People v.

People v. Corral

2019 IL App (1st) 171501 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 28, 2019

The supreme court observed, “[a]s discussed above, what we have in this case is the trial court denying defendant’s request to present relevant and probative testimony from a qualified expert … We observe that “[a] trial court is not required to allow an expert to render an opinion on every conceivable question simply because such expert is qualified to do

In re Detention of Varner

Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 9, 2000

The party challenging a statute bears the burden of clearly establishing that it is unconstitutional. People v. DePalma , 256 Ill. App. 3d 206, 210 (1994). … In this case, the trial court clearly indicated that it had sufficient information to make its decision.

Abel v. Fox

211 Ill. Dec. 129 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 17, 1995

noting the actual issue involved there, concluded: "We find Mid-Town stands for the proposition that where a defendant’s employment is contingent upon signing a restrictive covenant, without more, such evidence fails to establish … Clearly, the covenant was not ancillary to an employment contract. The sole purpose of the agreement was to restrain trade.” (Creative Entertainment, 265 Ill. App. 3d at 348-49 , 638 N.E.2d at 221 .)

Robinson v. Johnson

346 Ill. App. 3d 895 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 25, 2004

However, as we have previously pointed out in this opinion, it is our role to give effect to a clearly worded statute, no matter the result. … The three factors to be considered are: (1) whether the decision to be applied nonretroactively established a new principle of law, either by overruling clear past precedent on which litigants may have relied or by deciding

People v. Aleman

281 Ill. App. 3d 991 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 18, 1996

violation of his right to a "speedy prosecution” and speedy trial under the Illinois and United States Constitutions; (5) erred in finding that he was an active participant in the bribery scheme; and (6) improperly refused to immunize … The italicized language clearly demonstrates that Rule 368(b) applies only to parties who are entitled to seek review. Here, Aleman was not so entitled.

Uhr v. Lutheran General Hospital

226 Ill. App. 3d 236 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 26, 1992

Clearly, the jury could have determined from the testimony of Dr. … Ronnett and of the nurses is clearly and amply established by independent testimony, and should be imputed to the defendant hospital, thus providing the basis for affirming the judgment of the trial court.

Ittersagen v. Advocate Health and Hospitals Corp.

2020 IL App (1st) 190778 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 10, 2020

Thakadiyil to follow a strict definition of sepsis, two SIRS criteria and infection, which plaintiff clearly met when at the office visit. Counsel asserted that Dr. … The court found he was “clearly credible when he responded that he would be truthful, fair and unbiased.”

Bortone v. Court of Claims

2020 IL App (1st) 190853-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 23, 2020

A dismissal is proper under section 2-615 only when “it is clearly apparent from the pleadings that no set of facts can be proven that would entitle the plaintiff to recover.” Id. … With this constitutional authority, the legislature passed the State Lawsuit Immunity Act (Pub. Act 77-1776 (eff. Jan. 1, 1972)), “reinstituting the doctrine of sovereign immunity.” Parmar v.

People v. Shaffer

2024 IL App (4th) 240085-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 26, 2024

To establish probable cause, the State proffered an investigator with the Illinois Attorney General’s Office executed a search warrant for defendant’s home on January 11, 2024. … See 725 ILCS 5/110-6.1(a)(5) (West 2022) (requiring the State to allege and then prove clearly and convincingly that a person committed a detainable sex offense and poses a real and present threat to a person, persons,

Kolodziejzak v. M. Simon & Associates

Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 23, 1997

One such procedure established that garbage was to be taken out a glass side door one hour before closing, rather than taken out the back door after dark. … Thus, defendant clearly retained control of the security operations on its premises even though such services were provided by an outside security firm.