Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersIL

10,000+ results

4.59s

  • John J. Moroney and Company v. Illinois Property Tax Appeal Board

    2013 IL App (1st) 120493 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 4, 2014

    Factual determinations should only be reversed if they are against the manifest weight of the evidence, meaning an opposite conclusion is clearly evident. … Mixed questions of law and fact will only be reversed if the agency’s decision is “clearly erroneous.” Id. at 243-44.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • United States v. Black

    483 F. Supp. 2d 618 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 6, 2007

    The party alleging the existence of the qualified First Amendment right bears the burden of establishing both parts of this threshold test. … In light of the above-cited authority, the Tribune has failed to establish that “experience” establishes a constitutional right to access juror names during the pendency of trial. 2.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Dokos v. Miller

    517 F. Supp. 1039 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 17, 1981

    Whether that impact results from the state’s desire to stem fraud or to “count resources,” 6 the rule clearly contravenes the federal law directive that only actually available resources be considered for eligibility purposes … Recipients of cash benefits under either program have qualified as categorically needy for Medicaid purposes.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Bazydlo v. Volant

    264 Ill. App. 3d 105 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 28, 1994

    Peterson stated that she had two stacks of absentee ballots in front of her but could clearly recall initialing only one stack. … We hold that Volant has established by clear and convincing evidence an unchallenged inference that the uninitialed ballots were cast by absentee voters and that the initialing requirement does not contribute to the integrity

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Kozlowski v. Fry

    238 F. Supp. 2d 996 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 30, 2002

    are so favorable to the plaintiff that there can be no dispute among reasonable persons of impartial judgment that the plaintiff was clearly better qualified for the position at issue.” … The record clearly shows that, during Ms.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • In Re Price

    143 B.R. 190 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 15, 1992

    The purpose and length of the conversation and the person called or calling must be clearly set forth in the application. Id. … REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES The Applicant bears the burden of establishing that it is entitled to certain expenses.

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Lalvani v. Illinois Human Rights Comm'n

    Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 30, 2001

    Barbano is clearly distinguishable from the case at bar. … Here, the evidence clearly supports the existence of legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for the hospital's decision, including the hospital's stated reason that Lalvani was less qualified than Simms.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Chicago Teachers Union v. Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board

    334 Ill. App. 3d 936 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 24, 2002

    Where the agency’s findings present a mixed question of law and fact, we apply the clearly erroneous standard of review. AFM Messenger Service, Inc. v. … Instead, the grievance alleged, the Board of Education assigned Greenburg to teach second grade and assigned a less senior and less qualified teacher to the pre-kindergarten class.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Walter Kidde Portable Equipment, Inc. v. Universal Security Instruments, Inc.

    669 F. Supp. 2d 895 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 22, 2009

    Once an antitrust plaintiff gets around the immunity issue, which USI has done here by bringing its claim under both Walker Process and Handgards, it must still meet the antitrust pleading requirements. … Technologies Group, Inc., No. 03-232, 2004 WL 1427136 , at *6-7 (E.D.Pa., June 21, 2004) (noting that the Third Circuit has not held that litigation costs alone qualify as an antitrust injury).

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Bowers v. Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

    57 F. Supp. 2d 594 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 22, 1999

    Opposition clearly includes filing a charge with the EEOC, bringing a lawsuit in court, or submitting a complaint to management. Informal methods of opposition can also constitute protected activity. … Davis is protected by a qualified privilege. See Hamros v.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Foster v. Alex

    213 Ill. App. 3d 1001 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 28, 1991

    Reliance is clearly required in a claim of negligent misrepresentation. On that point, we affirm the circuit court. However, we find it necessary to comment on the use of the qualifying term “justifiable.” … But, in the context of this case, “justifiable” merely calls for the plaintiff to establish that which he is already required to establish in order to, bring his claim — that defendant is a person who is in the business of

    Cited 23 timesPublished
  • Diefendorf v. City of Peoria

    Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 3, 1999

    They argue that the map provides further evidence that bicyclists are permitted, but not intended, because the map establishes routes upon streets, and not upon sidewalks. … Finally, the defendants argue that the lack of markings or physical signs describing the sidewalk as a bicycle route clearly shows Peoria's lack of intent to make it such.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Cook County Sheriff Sheahan v. Bianchi

    296 Ill. App. 3d 310 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 24, 1998

    A passing score was established to be a minimum of 57 correct answers. … The sheriff took the position that when an employee was clearly shown not to have been properly certified, that employee could be fired at will, without a hearing. Vanko, 278 Ill. App. 3d at 303 .

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Adkins v. Sarah Bush Lincoln Health Center

    129 Ill. 2d 497 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 20, 1989

    Count II sought money damages and a declaration that the defendants’ conduct was not immunized, but was willful and wanton. … Clearly there would be situations in which both would be under consideration at the same time. In reviewing the peer review decision of a public hospital, the court in Ladenheim v. Union County Hospital (1979), 76 Ill.

    Cited 106 timesPublished
  • Selof v. Island Foods, Inc.

    251 Ill. App. 3d 675 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 5, 1993

    was motivated by unlawful considerations, that is, the discharge was in contravention of a clearly mandated public policy ( Fellhauer v. … It is possible that under qualifying circumstances a recovering alcoholic or substance abuser may conceivably have a statutory cause of action based on disability or handicap under State (see, e.g., Habinka v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • People v. Brown

    2014 IL App (4th) 120887 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 25, 2014

    The letter from his trial counsel attached to his postconviction petition clearly demonstrates he was advised of the incorrect sentencing range. … Again, for first-stage purposes, a defendant need only establish it is arguable he was prejudiced. DuPree, 397 Ill.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Shanahan v. City of Chicago

    875 F. Supp. 535 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 14, 1995

    Qualified union members possess their own First Amendment and Shakman rights.” (Pl.’s Rsp. to Def.’s Affirmative Defense of Qualified Immunity at p. 3) (emphasis in original). … In essence, he argues that the First Amendment rights of qualified Local 126 members were somehow infringed by the hiring of all members whether qualified or not. See id.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • PMC Casualty Corp. v. Virginia Surety Co., Inc.

    District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 19, 2025

    the qualified immunity-based appeal is frivolous. … Besides double jeopardy and qualified immunity, the Seventh Circuit has extended its automatic stay rule to appeals from the denial of other forms of immunity from suit, Goshtasby v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Nelson v. Quarles and Brady, LLP

    997 N.E.2d 872 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 2013

    This result, plaintiff contends, would have made Curia a majority owner and was “clearly contrary to the terms of the option.” … ¶ 42 The court also was clearly disturbed by the fact that Goldstein had engaged in fraud and felt compelled to point this out in its section 2-619 analysis: “The courts of Illinois have a long-established

    Cited 14 timesUnpublished
  • People v. Walker

    211 Ill. 2d 317 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 4, 2004

    The State then called its two key witnesses, Aprylle and Crystal Watson, who had been granted immunity by the State for their testimony. … Thus, to prove a violation of section 24 — 1.1, the prosecutor must establish only the defendant’s felon status.

    Cited 128 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.