Case law

In re Syngenta Litigation

2023 IL App (5th) 200353-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 14, 2023

Aug. 28, 2020) clearly vacated M.R. 30370 (eff. Mar. 24, 2020), effective as of September 1, 2020. … This interpretative rule is usually referred to as the “series-qualifier canon.”

People v. Smith

Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 7, 2001

A petition filed under the Act must “clearly set forth the respects in which petitioner’s constitutional rights were violated.” 725 ILCS 5/122-2 (West 1998). … doubt, appellate counsel argued that Officer McCann’s testimony that a .357 Magnum handgun was capable of firing .38 caliber bullets was not probative of the issue because the testimony was irrelevant and McCann was never qualified

Global Research Distribution, Inc. v. One Stop Mailing LLC

2025 IL App (3d) 240298 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 6, 2025

However, the court dismissed Global’s claims, finding that it could not adequately establish damages. Global appeals from that ruling. … When Global reimbursed fees to someone else, who in turn incurred obligations to someone else, this chain of reimbursement obligations introduces too much attenuation to qualify as a natural and proximate

Cabrera v. Wiremasters, Inc

2023 IL App (1st) 220484-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 31, 2023

This immunity applies to loaning and borrowing employers. [Citation.]” Morales v. Herrera, 2016 IL App (1st) 153540, ¶ 14. … ¶ 14 Thus, if plaintiff was a borrowed employee of defendant, defendant is entitled to the immunity provided by the Act.

Warner v. The Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity and Benefit Fund of the City of Chicago

2022 IL App (1st) 200833-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 7, 2022

It is well-established that a police officer does not qualify for a line- of-duty disability pension merely because the officer was injured while on duty. … As previously stated, a claimant does not have to establish that the disability was solely caused or even primarily caused by the act of duty incident.

Butler v. BRG Sports, LLC

2019 IL App (1st) 180362 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 21, 2019

“Retired Players who receive Qualifying Diagnoses in the future will be on equal footing with those who are currently suffering.” Id. at 377. … Retired Players who receive more severe Qualifying Diagnoses after receiving initial Monetary Awards are entitled to supplemental payments.” Id.

People v. Tawanda R.

298 Ill. App. 3d 905 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 7, 1998

At that time, Hakeem was five months old but had not had any immunizations. … Contrary to the trial court’s determination, the record establishes that Tawanda was an unfit parent where she failed to maintain a reasonable degree of interest, concern, or responsibility as to Davonte’s welfare, failed

Gallaher v. Hasbrouk

2013 IL App (1st) 122969 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 24, 2014

App. 3d 570, 578, 695 N.E.2d 873, 879 (1998) (exhaustion not required where village board of fire and police sought declaratory judgment that sovereign immunity deprived Department of Human Rights and Human … It is well established that it is the substance of an order, not its form, that matters. Sherman West Court, 407 Ill.

People v. Johnson

2013 IL App (2d) 110535 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 31, 2013

In those instances, evidence of a defendant’s commission of a prior qualifying offense may be admitted, in the trial court’s discretion, to show the defendant’s propensity to commit the charged offense if, after … Failure to establish either prong is fatal to the claim. Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687; Pineda, 373 Ill.

Doe v. Township High School District 211

2015 IL App (1st) 140857 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 19, 2015

Employees Tort Immunity] Act" (745 ILCS 10/1-101 et seq. … ¶ 110 In sum, defendants failed to satisfy their burden of showing that these items qualified as a communication to an attorney or that Cates qualified as part of the control group.

People v. Williams

201 Ill. App. 3d 207 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 29, 1990

Defendant maintains that the opinions of the defense experts “were clearly superior to that of the State’s Dr. Reifman.” The expert testimony was in considerable conflict. … And this was clearly a break with reality.” Dr. Conroe explained that defendant might have failed to mention the voices in their interview because he did not remember them.

People v. Fort

133 Ill. App. 2d 473 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 1, 1971

In the guest for an impartial and qualified jury, Negro and white, Protestant and Catholic, are alike subject to being challenged without cause. … The testimony clearly establishes that Davis had reasonable grounds to believe Oliver was going through his car, that Davis pursued and effected a citizens’ arrest of Oliver, and that Davis made it clear to all observers

Forest Preserve District v. Illinois Labor Relations Board

308 Ill. Dec. 166 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 21, 2006

MOU I also provided severance pay for golf driving range employees, initiated their layoff and recall rights, and established “bumping rights” based on seniority. … Whether a matter concerns wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment is a question that the administrative agency “is uniquely qualified to answer.” Central City, 149 Ill. 2d at 523 .

People v. Munoz

2020 IL App (1st) 180167-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 2020

Matters of trial strategy are generally immune from claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. [Citations.]” Id., ¶¶ 56-58. … We find -9- 1-18-0167 defendant has established, at best, a tactical error but definitely has failed to establish a misunderstanding of the law.

Ming Auto Body/Ming of Decatur, Inc. v. Industrial Commission

387 Ill. App. 3d 244 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 18, 2008

He looked unsuccessfully for part-time employment as a foreman or estimator and applied for work at between 17 and 20 businesses, but stopped looking when he qualified for social security disability benefits about a year … For a finding of fact to be against the manifest weight of the evidence, an opposite conclusion must be clearly apparent. University of Illinois v. Industrial Comm’n, 365 Ill. App. 3d 906, 910 , 851 N.E.2d 72 (2006).

People v. Jenkins

2020 IL App (3d) 180551 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 21, 2020

Logically, in some cases, a codefendant’s trial transcript may qualify as a recorded oral statement of a common witness that is subject to disclosure. As observed by the court in People v. … Instead, the court appeared to believe that the case law established that an indigent but pro se defendant would never be entitled to free access to a transcript of a prior proceeding.

In re Estate of Mankowski

30 N.E.3d 1111 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 24, 2014

the treatments he gave to Walter were contraindicated for a patient with severely decreased liver function; failing to consult with experts and medical doctors; failing to properly monitor Walter with qualified … Thus, defendants’ assertion strikes me as clearly inaccurate. ¶ 75 This court has previously approved of Pavlov (Jablonski, 287 Ill.

People v. Albea

95 N.E.3d 1220 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 15, 2017

¶ 27 Based on the foregoing, we find that the trial court clearly abused its discretion when it denied defendant’s unequivocal and unambiguous request to represent himself, based on its … Defendant contends that he has established reversible plain error under the second prong of the plain-error rule. We agree.

Arora v. Chui

279 Ill. App. 3d 321 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 26, 1996

Clearly, malicious prosecution and abuse of process are recognized causes of action in Illinois. … Accordingly, we find that the Chuis failed to establish a prima facie case. For the foregoing reasons, we find that the Chuis failed to establish a prima facie case for either malicious prosecution or abuse of process.

People v. Anderson

102 N.E.3d 786 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 20, 2018

On June 9, Carter appeared before the grand jury again and testified in exchange for immunity from prosecution for the probation violation. … ¶ 28 Thus, the State’s argument was clearly in error. See People v.