Case law

Stewart v. Thrasher

242 Ill. App. 3d 10 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 25, 1993

Rather, Warf testified he would have checked box “D” on the form, and recommend the building be examined by a qualified building expert. … Our review of the evidence does not clearly indicate an opposite conclusion should have been drawn.

Bickerstaff v. Nordstrom, Inc.

48 F. Supp. 2d 790 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 3, 1999

Barry’s poor performance, even if proven, would not establish that Plaintiff was as qualified as he; since Plaintiff never held the position, there is no evidence that he would have outperformed Mr. Barry. … Even assuming, arguendo, that Plaintiff was qualified for the job, Mr. Principato was far better qualified.

People v. Patterson

2018 IL App (1st) 160610 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 17, 2019

-5- ¶ 24 Due process requires that the proscriptions of a criminal statute be clearly defined. City of Chicago v. … The presence of the limiting language in the recidivist provisions of the Unified Code of Corrections and the absence of that language in the AHC statute establishes that defendant’s claim has no arguable basis

Crawford v. Anagnostopoulos

69 Ill. App. 3d 954 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 27, 1979

Monson suggested two possible courses of action: surgical intervention to re-establish flow through the brachial artery or reliance on the development of collateral circulation to establish adequate flow to plaintiff’s forearm … The record clearly indicates, by plaintiff’s own testimony, that defendant did refer her to both a cardiovascular surgeon, Dr. Nennhaus, and a physiatrist, Dr. Spiegler.

Jackson v. City of Chicago

293 F. Supp. 2d 836 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 25, 2003

City has clearly fulfilled that obligation by repeatedly notifying Jackson that she could apply for reassignment pursuant to City’s standard policy (C. St. ¶¶ 128-29, 132, 136). … Conclusion Because Jackson has not raised a genuine issue of material fact as to whether she is a “qualified individual with a disability,” she has not established a central element of her claim.

Kross v. Western Elec. Co., Inc.

534 F. Supp. 251 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 1, 1982

Thus, at termination, Kross was two years shy of qualifying for a service pension, although he does qualify for a deferred service pension. … Judge Shadur stated: Section 502(a)(1) is clearly inapplicable to the facts alleged in Count IV.

State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Martin

296 Ill. App. 3d 466 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 6, 1998

While his participation in the crimes resulting in death was obviously criminal, it does not clearly follow that Martin expected or intended the deaths. See Taylor v. … The record establishes that Martin did not foresee the deaths or intend any bodily injury or death.

Rice v. Marathon Petroleum Corp.

2024 IL 129628 · Illinois Supreme Court · May 23, 2024

If the legislature had intended to create an express private right of action, it clearly knows how to do so. … and administer the Underground Storage Tank Fund, which could be accessed by qualified owners or operators to meet their financial responsibility requirements under the Act. 415 ILCS 5/57 (West 2018)

People v. Gonzalez

151 Ill. 2d 79 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 24, 1992

The evidence adduced at trial in this case clearly established each of these elements. … Thus Hobbs is clearly distinguishable from the instant case.

Burdett v. Labriola

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 2022

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … After all, qualified immunity closely depends “on the facts of the case” and a “complaint is generally not dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) on qualified immunity grounds.” Alvarado v.

Brown v. Illinois State Police

2020 IL App (3d) 180409 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 4, 2021

In addition to establishing many of the facts set forth above, the evidence presented at the hearing can be summarized as follows. ¶8 Brown testified that he was 51 years old, worked as a truck driver, and … The crime of which Brown was convicted in California in 2001 clearly qualifies as a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

Stern v. People

102 Ill. 540 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1882

The defence is clearly without merit, and the "demurrer to the plea was properly sustained. … ,c, or until a successor to the removed treasurer shall be elected or appointed and qualified.

ALEXIAN BROTHERS HEALTH PROVIDERS ASSOC., INC. v. Humana Health Plan, Inc.

608 F. Supp. 2d 1018 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 21, 2009

Evidence should be excluded in limine only when it is clearly inadmissible on all potential grounds (Jimenez v. United States, No. 06 C 5943, 2008 WL 3849915 , at *1 (N.D.Ill. Aug. 14)). … It is thus the movant’s burden to establish that the evidence sought to be excluded is not admissible for any purpose (id.).

Bernardoni v. Industrial Commission

362 Ill. App. 3d 582 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 6, 2005

In some respects, claimant did not qualify for such a diagnosis because one of the criteria is normal pulmonary test results, which claimant did not have. … Vetter was qualified to testify as an expert about causation.

Davis v. Hutchinson

282 Ill. 523 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1918

A provision against the alienation of property after granting a fee violates a long established rule of law. In Little v. … The will so clearly devised a fee simple estate to the adopted daughter and then attempted a restraint upon alienation that the rule as to such restraints being void must be applied and enforced.

People ex rel. Morris v. Opie

301 Ill. 11 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1921

It was held that the curative act did not grant any special or exclusive privilege, immunity or franchise and therefore did not come within the constitutional prohibition. … territory provided that an election therein might be held dispensing with the safeguards of the Ballot law in respect to opening and conducting the election, and the district should be legally organized thereby, it would clearly

Haywood v. Illinois (In Re Haywood)

62 B.R. 482 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 20, 1986

The foregoing clearly establishes that the debtor was required to file amended State income tax returns after the adjustment to his federal income tax returns became final. … Clearly they were not fulfilled by the State, nor could they be. The State’s work papers cannot possibly constitute a filing under applicable State law.

United States v. Chicago Title and Trust Company

242 F. Supp. 56 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 10, 1965

Goodrich, president of Chicago Title, stated Chicago Title was qualified to transact business only in the State of Illinois, and not in the State of Missouri. … Chicago Title is not qualified under the Revised Statutes of Missouri §§ 381.010 to 381.200, and has not made the deposits with the Missouri Superintendent of Insurance as required by § 381.030.

Alexander v. Industrial Comm'n

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 30, 2000

Based on the foregoing, the arbitrator, while finding that claimant "clearly cannot return to his prior occupation," concluded that claimant failed to meet his burden of establishing he fell into the "odd-lot" category. … Again, where competing inferences can be drawn, we defer to the Commission unless a contrary conclusion is clearly apparent. We cannot say so here.

Western Foundry Co. v. Industrial Commission

298 Ill. 593 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 22, 1921

Board at the request of either the employer or the employee, on the ground that the disability of the employee has subsequently recurred, increased, diminished or ended; and on such review, compensation payments may be re-established … The evidence taken on the petition for rehearing before the Industrial Commission indicates clearly that he was suffering at least as much,—if not more severely,—as he was at the time of the hearing before the arbitrator;