Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersIL

10,000+ results

1.70s

  • Weisbrod v. Lowitz

    282 Ill. App. 252 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 12, 1935

    Considering the evidence as having established that defendants were brokers acting for plaintiff in this transaction, are they amenable to the Illinois Securities Law? … It clearly is aimed at those, who sell stock not qualified. In every transaction of this nature there are' two parties — a buyer and a seller.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Chicago Joint Bd., Amal. Cloth. Wkrs. v. Chicago Tribune Co.

    307 F. Supp. 422 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 19, 1969

    Supp. 864, 869 (N.D.Ill.1967), “(i)t is elementary that in order to establish a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, there must be ‘state action’ which results in deprivation of a right, privilege or immunity protected … It found, as we could find in the instant case, that “as an expression of grievance and protest on one of the major issues of our time, (the advertisement) would seem- clearly to qualify for the constitutional protection.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Zimmer v. Village of Willowbrook

    242 Ill. App. 3d 437 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 12, 1993

    Stat. 1991, ch. 110, par. 2 — 619), finding that plaintiffs’ cause of action was time barred by section 8 — 101 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act) (111. Rev. … If, on remand, plaintiffs properly establish the culverts to be an improvement, then section 13— 214(a) will apply.

    Cited 49 timesPublished
  • Girsberger v. Kresz

    261 Ill. App. 3d 398 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 27, 1993

    Kresz proposed that he and plaintiff enter into a partnership in Chicago, where Kresz had established operations. … However, in the corporate resolution terminating plaintiff’s employment, it is a statement that clearly accuses the plaintiff of a want of integrity in the discharge of the duties of employment.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Holmes v. Aurora Police Pension Fund Board of Trustees

    217 Ill. App. 3d 338 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 9, 1991

    Plaintiff also argues that the Pension Board’s proceedings are effectively immune from review and that the Board is improperly using “permanent irrebuttable arguments” that diabetics are unfit to be police officers. … IO8V2, par. 3 — 106) and should therefore be entitled to pension benefits since section 3 — 101 of the Pension Code provides that “the board of trustees *** shall establish and administer a police pension fund *** for the

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Dark v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.

    175 Ill. App. 3d 26 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 8, 1988

    The defense of an absolute or qualified privilege to a common law action for libel has long been established in Illinois. … Clearly, plaintiff cannot claim a misnomer here and section 2—616(d) is inapplicable.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • USX Corp. v. White

    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.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • In Re Petition of Ill. Judicial Inquiry Bd

    128 Ill. App. 3d 798 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 13, 1984

    candidate is qualified." … Once a qualified privilege is established, the party seeking disclosure must show a "particular need" for the information. Equal Employment Opportunity Com. v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • United States v. Illinois

    148 F.R.D. 587 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 9, 1993

    The party asserting the protection of a privilege has the burden of establishing both the existence and applicability of the privilege. Brock v. Gerace, 110 F.R.D. 58 (D.N.J.1986). … Clearly, however, the goal of the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act is compelling.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • People v. Masterson

    207 Ill. 2d 305 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 2, 2003

    We note that statutes are presumed constitutional, and the party challenging the validity of a statute has the burden of clearly establishing that it is unconstitutional. In re Curtis B., 203 Ill. 2d 53, 58 (2002). … Clearly, the justices of the Crane majority did not believe their decision called into question the continued viability of Hendricks.

    Cited 67 timesPublished
  • Bullis v. City of Chicago

    235 Ill. 472 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 18, 1908

    the payment of a salary to the person acting as an officer, and clearly it could not be. … The word “prescribed,” as there used, is equivalent to “established.”

    Cited 48 timesPublished
  • Tenorio v. Village of Robbins

    District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 27, 2019

    qualified immunity. … Police officers “are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • McReaken v. Illinois Department of Corrections

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 26, 2024

    “To overcome qualified immunity, the facts viewed in the light most favorable to [the plaintiff] must ‘show that the defendant[s] violated a constitutional right’ and that ‘the right was clearly established at [that] time … The threshold inquiry a court must undertake in a qualified immunity analysis is whether plaintiff’s allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation. See Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 736 (2002).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Burns v. Lifferth

    431 Ill. Dec. 867 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 7, 2019

    ." ¶ 10 In addition, Heather noted that, with certain qualifiers, she generally agreed that August could take one of the children for an evaluation on possible occupational therapy. … Heather did not clearly agree *876 *1046 to any modifications to summer parenting time or transportation/exchange locations.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Vestrup v. Du Page County Election Commission

    335 Ill. App. 3d 156 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 31, 2002

    that, where a word or phrase is used in different sections of the same legislative act, a court presumes that the word or phrase is used with the same meaning throughout the act, unless a contrary legislative intent is clearly … However, in our view this use of “territorial area” merely was to underscore the necessity that the entire district or political subdivision voted as a unit in the last election for a party to qualify for the status of established

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Torry v. City Of Chicago

    District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 20, 2018

    Again, once Defendants invoked qualified immunity, it became Plaintiffs’ burden to show that Defendants violated a clearly established right. See al-Kidd, 563 U.S. at 735. … In any event, because Defendant Officers invoke qualified immunity, the burden again shifts to Plaintiffs to identify clearly established law violated by Defendants’ conduct.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Rehfield v. Diocese of Joliet

    450 Ill. Dec. 677 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 4, 2021

    A court should not dismiss a complaint pursuant to this section unless it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recovery. … Her action bears directly on the Diocese’s right to select its ministers, assuming plaintiff qualifies as a minister.

    Cited 41 timesPublished
  • Stapleton v. Advocate Health Care Network

    76 F. Supp. 3d 796 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 31, 2014

    If the statute stopped there, then Advocate would clearly lose: Advocate established its plan, and therefore its plan was not established by a church. … Advocate would have this amendment signify that Congress also now intended for a plan simply maintained by any self-affiliated organization to qualify (without the *805 need for church establishment), Defs.’

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Redlin v. Village of Hanover Park

    278 Ill. App. 3d 183 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 13, 1996

    The Village bases its argument on section 3 — 102(a) of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act), which provides in part that the Village "has the duty to exercise ordinary care … Following Wagner, Thomas’ claim is not barred by section 3 — 102(a) of the Tort Immunity Act.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Turgeon v. Commonwealth Edison Co.

    258 Ill. App. 3d 234 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 21, 1994

    Plaintiff concludes that because the Recreational Use Act did not apply, Edison did not have qualified immunity from the ordinary negligence standard and the case should have been presented to the jury under the ordinary … The plain language of the statute clearly includes "water” in its definition of "land.” (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 70, par. 32(a) (now 745 ILCS 65/2(a) (West 1992)).)

    Cited 17 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.