Case law

People v. Olinger

Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1997

Stalder would receive absolute immunity on the Illinois burglary from Mr. Spencer, Mr. … Therefore, the statement does not qualify to be admitted as substantive evidence under this exception to the hearsay rule.

Smith v. Department of Registration & Education

170 Ill. App. 3d 40 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 11, 1988

The trial court found that plaintiff had not established a protectable right to prehearing discovery or an inadequate remedy at law. … Based on our holding that the trial court properly dismissed the complaint, we need not address the Department’s contention that plaintiff’s claim is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

Counts v. American Psychological Assn.

District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 5, 2025

Pursuant to § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court may dismiss a case or deny an otherwise qualified plaintiff leave to proceed IFP, if the action is clearly frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or is a claim for money damages … It is well-established that court-appointed psychological evaluators are “protected by the same immunity extended to judges and other judicial officers.”) (collecting cases); Schloss v.

Gallagher v. Lenart

Illinois Supreme Court · Aug 9, 2007

We agree that a claim to enforce a workers’ compensation lien qualifies as a “claim under the Workers’ Compensation Act” in the abstract. … Dismantling Co., 20 Ohio St. 3d 61, 65, 485 N.E.2d 1047, 1051 (1985) (“The statutory and constitutional immunity granted to complying employers is crucial to workers’ compensation law. *** [B]efore this immunity may be considered

Whittington v. Hunt

296 Ill. 133 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1920

It has also become the settled policy of the courts to adopt that construction of a will that will give an estate of inheritance to the first devisee unless other limiting or qualifying clauses in the will disclose, clearly … and unequivocally, that it was the intention of the testator to limit or qualify the estate granted.

Jackson-Hicks v. The East St. Louis Board of Election Commissioners

2015 IL App (5th) 150028 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 26, 2015

“[F]actual determinations are against the manifest weight of the evidence if the opposite conclusion is clearly evident.” … The “clearly erroneous” standard of review applies to mixed questions of law and fact. Cinkus, 228 Ill. 2d at 211.

In Re Marriage of Hall

404 Ill. App. 3d 160 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 25, 2010

With respect to the Anheuser-Busch Deferred Income Stock Purchase and Savings Plan, the parties agree to enter into a Qualified Domestic Relations Order [(QDRO)] providing for the distribution of fifty percent (50%) of the … Petitioner argues that the language of the marital settlement agreement clearly reflects the parties’ intent to equally divide all of respondent’s retirement plans that accrued during the marriage. We agree.

Hendricks v. Board of Trustees of the Police Pension Fund of the City of Galesburg

2015 IL App (3d) 140858 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 1, 2015

Questions of law, however, are subject to de novo review, and mixed questions of fact and law are reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard. Id. … Our review of the Board’s decision in this case extends to all questions of law and fact presented by the entire record established in the hearing before the Board.

Arts Club of Chicago v. Dept. of Revenue

334 Ill. App. 3d 235 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 27, 2002

The Department contends, however, that review of the evidence related to the remaining Korzen factors establishes that the Club did not qualify as an institution of public charity. … clearly and convincingly that it was entitled to an exemption.

Bandala-Martinez v. Fry

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 20, 2020

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields “government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … (2) whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct.

Atria v. Geist

64 Ill. App. 3d 88 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 15, 1978

Olson was well qualified to express an opinion. The principles in regard to the admission of expert testimony are well settled. … However, the trial court’s determination that this witness was not an expert is clearly erroneous in light of Mr. Olson’s background and experience in all phases of the painting field over the last 15 years. Mr.

Progress Development Corporation v. Mitchell

182 F. Supp. 681 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 4, 1960

A qualified park planner was hired by the Park Board in May, 1959. He made a study and viewed the properties now known as Floral Park Subdivision and Pear Tree Subdivision. … That was clearly brought out by the testimony of the Park Board officials, by plaintiffs’ own witness Whitney, and by the park-planning expert, witness Roy Layman.

Beall v. Albert

159 Ill. 127 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 25, 1895

Minson’s testimony was not taken, and no presumption that he performed his official duty can be indulged, in the face of the clearly established fact that he disregarded and neglected that duty. … That any such change was made was not clearly proved, but there was evidence tending to prove that certain ballots had in fact been changed.

Gates v. Holy Cross Hospital

175 Ill. App. 3d 439 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 26, 1988

A dismissal should not be based solely on the pleadings “unless it clearly appears that no set of facts can be proved which will entitle plaintiffs to recover.” (Fitzgerald v. … Therefore, based on this grant of immunity from civil liability, we conclude that the trial court properly dismissed counts III through IX with prejudice.

State ex rel. Raoul v. Elite Staffing, Inc.

2024 IL 128763 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 19, 2024

“ ‘If a practice is within the per se category, all you have to prove to establish a violation is that the defendant engaged in the practice; you do not have to show that in fact the practice has had … Because Rahl appeared before the legislature as a proponent of the bill the legislature enacted, we find that his article qualifies as some evidence concerning the intent of the legislation. William N.

Jones

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 31, 2026

Qualified Immunity Keehma moves to dismiss based on qualified immunity. That argument runs into a now-familiar problem. … Here, Keehma does not argue that the complaint itself establishes qualified immunity. Instead, Keehma argues that he had qualified immunity because he was enforcing a court order. See Brf., at 10 (Dckt. No. 24).

Memorial Gardens Ass'n, Inc. v. Smith

16 Ill. 2d 116 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 23, 1959

Liberty implies only the absence of arbitrary restraint, not immunity from reasonable regulations and prohibitions imposed in the interests of the community. - (Crowley v. … If the establishment of a trust is a proper method to protect the public interest and welfare in the one instance, it is not improper in the other.

Mayes v. Elrod

470 F. Supp. 1188 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 18, 1979

to establish, “whenever feasible,” separate detention and commitment facilities. … This language creates alternative methods for establishing the requisite causation for § 1983 liability.

Contemporary Music Group, Inc. v. Chicago Park District

57 Ill. App. 3d 182 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 20, 1978

Furthermore, immunity from the proper exercise of this power may not be granted by a contract of the State or a municipality. (City of Chicago v. Illinois Commerce Com. ex rel. Chicago & Western Indiana R.R. Co.) … Clearly, the resolution does not violate equal protection on its face, since it does not violate the special legislation provision (Ill. Const. 1970, art.

People v. Curvin

81 Ill. App. 3d 481 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 27, 1980

The record establishes the defendant was properly admonished as to the consequences of his plea, and defendant has not alleged in his post-conviction petition that his plea was involuntary. … Bogolowski (1927), 326 Ill. 253 , the defendant had an agreement with the prosecutor that he would receive immunity if he testified; defendant served three years in jail instead.