Case law

Tremper v. Board of Education School District No. 89

3 Ill. App. 3d 264 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 27, 1971

Stat. 1969, ch. 122, pars. 9 — 3 and 9 — 9) the legislature clearly indicated that a voter may vote anywhere in the school district and cannot be directed by a notice of election to vote in the precinct where he resides. … For the purposes of this act a person qualified to vote in a school election shall be known as a legal voter or voter.

Hacker v. Halley

458 Ill. Dec. 149 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 15, 2021

qualified voters of an established political party nominates candidates for municipal office in a municipality with a population under 5000. … Regardless of whether this purported justification for disparately treating established political parties holds any water, the simple fact remains that the legislature has clearly stated its intent to treat

Commerce Bank v. Youth Services of Mid-Illinois Inc.

Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 23, 2002

immunity. … Clearly, the majority's finding that "every interaction defendant had with the Augsburgers was dictated by DCFS regulations" is erroneous. Slip op at 9.

Grace Community Church Assemblies of God v. Department of Revenue

409 Ill. App. 3d 480 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 18, 2011

Decisions of mixed questions of law and fact are reversible only if they are clearly erroneous. Cinkus, 228 Ill. 2d at 211 , 886 N.E.2d at 1018 . The clearly erroneous standard is “significantly deferential.” … However, neither the exemption statute nor cases interpreting it have established a minimum required frequency of use for religious purposes. In general, unused property cannot qualify for an exemption.

In re The Detention of White

2016 IL App (1st) 151187 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 30, 2016

The record here clearly establishes that both State experts testified that White’s two disorders of os-paraphilic disorder, nonconsenting females, and os-antisocial personality disorder, in conjunction, … clearly establishes that Drs.

Busch v. Schuttler

216 Ill. App. 212 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 10, 1919

The other qualified and proceeded to perform his duties. It was held that there was no authority in the court to appoint a trustee to act with the one who qualified. … One only qualified. No.provision was made for the appointment of a successor, and it is apparent that the testator did not intend that the failure of one trustee to qualify should create a vacancy.

People v. Knowles

76 Ill. App. 3d 1004 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 28, 1979

In order to establish the lack of competent representation by an appointed counsel, it is necessary for the defendant to clearly demonstrate actual incompetency of counsel, as reflected by the manner of carrying out his duties … Defendant raises no other matter which could be considered to be more than an error in judgment or trial strategy, neither of which can establish incompetency of counsel. (People v.

C.J. v. Department of Human Services

331 Ill. App. 3d 871 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 24, 2002

SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY The Department claims that under the doctrine of sovereign immunity the trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to issue an injunction. … Article XIII, section 4, of the Illinois Constitution abolished sovereign immunity but gave the General Assembly the power to provide for immunity by law. Ill. Const. 1970, art. XIII, § 4.

USX Corp. v. White

352 Ill. App. 3d 709 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 1, 2004

If a company qualifies for use of this method, it is required to do so. … Sections 11.50(a)(1) and (a)(2) clearly indicate that the legislature intended that a single surviving corporation remain after a statutory merger.

Anderson v. Beach

Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 24, 2008

He argues that conditional privilege—also known as qualified privilege—does not apply and even if it did, Beach abused the privilege by recklessly failing to investigate the truth of her statements. … Once a defendant establishes conditional privilege, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show an abuse of the privilege. Gist v. Macon County Sheriff's Department, 284 Ill.

London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Horn

101 Ill. App. 355 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 6, 1902

Numerous cases, arising upon varied states of fact, are cited by counsel, which we can not, within the limits of this opinion, undertake to review, which go to establish the general proposition that no right of action arises … If this was so, then clearly, malice, as matter of law, on the part of appellant is established.

Village of Bourbonnais v. Herbert

86 Ill. App. 2d 367 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 24, 1967

The evidence establishes that no such special permits have been applied for by defendants with respect to the property in question. … The use involved in that case was one clearly compatible with certain areas of the municipality so that the total exclusion of such use from that municipality was clearly unreasonable.

People v. Grayer

403 Ill. App. 3d 797 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 24, 2010

upon a new qualifying conviction or disposition. … App. 3d 127, 130 (2009)), the “possibility of an unjust or absurd result is generally not enough to avoid the application of a clearly worded statute.” Petersen v. Wallach, 198 Ill. 2d 439, 447 (2002).

Curtis v. Chicago Transit Authority

341 Ill. App. 3d 573 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 23, 2003

Although Saragusa was decided under now-repealed section 8 — 102 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (the Tort Immunity Act) (Ill. Rev. … Plaintiff here was represented by counsel, who was clearly aware of the requirements of section 41, but failed to comply with those requirements.

In re Marriage of Kehoe

2012 IL App (1st) 110644 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 16, 2012

The parties clearly agreed upon a formula for calculating the pension apportionment during the time of dissolution. … These differences clearly demonstrate that the judgment in the case at bar was not “silent” in regard to the method of pension apportionment.

People Ex Rel. Rappaport v. Drazek

30 Ill. App. 3d 310 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 24, 1975

Stat. 1969, ch. 127, pars. 63b101 et seq.), clearly gives the Director of Personnel the power and discretion to add to current eligible lists. … Suffice it to say that a reading of both provisions clearly reveals no such limitation. Consequently, respondents cannot be restricted to any such procedure.

Henriksen v. Illinois Racing Board

293 Ill. App. 3d 569 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 2, 1997

On October 7, 1995, Henriksen drove a horse in a qualifying race in New Jersey. On October 9, 1995, Henriksen drove horses in two races in New York, and a third horse in a race in New Jersey. … Ed. 565, 568 (1878): "The authority of every tribunal is necessarily restricted by the territorial limits of the State in which it is established.

People v. Samuels

240 N.E.3d 1232 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 17, 2024

offense in Case 1, and (3) he was not charged with a qualifying offense in Case 2 … These provisions demonstrate that the legislature knew how to clearly state when pretrial release is mandatory and when it is discretionary.

Mandziara v. Canulli

Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 24, 1998

Canulli clearly sought access for himself and Jursich by issuing a records subpoena. … We have said: "The statute clearly indicates the legislature intended to modify absolute common law witness immunity in order to provide a remedy of damages against persons who violate the act." Renzi , 249 Ill.

People v. Morgan

39 Ill. App. 3d 588 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 11, 1976

At trial, the State tendered a petition, which was granted, to give immunity to Mae Liza Lee for any matter relating to the kflling of Theodore Fletcher. … It is weU established that an issue not presented to or considered by the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. (People v. Howell, 60 Ill. 2d 117 , 324 N.E.2d 403 ; People v.