Case law

Griefen v. Garin & Standard Surety & Casualty Co. of New York

318 Ill. App. 151 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 10, 1943

That provision supports- defendant’s view of the bond, because clearly, the provision is intended to protect creditors. … It is our opinion that the bond is clearly a statutory refunding bond, required under the terms of sec. 117, ch. 3, Ill. Rev.

Schimandle v. DeKalb County Sheriff's Office

District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 16, 2023

Qualified Immunity Det. Duehning is also entitled to qualified immunity. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009). … A court not only can address qualified immunity based on the pleadings, but sometimes must grant qualified immunity at this stage. Doe v. Vill. Arlington Heights, 782 F.2d 911, 916 (7th Cir. 2015).

Silverstein v. Brander

317 Ill. App. 3d 1000 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 11, 2000

The judge read into the record the portion of the deposition that he took to establish the lack of familiarity: “Q. … The Cook County Circuit Court Rules of Practice clearly provide for adequate notice to be given to a party before that party is called upon to defend against a motion for summary judgment.

People v. E.H.

299 Ill. App. 3d 42 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 1, 1998

Although the court reasoned that the State’s promise of immunity to the accomplice undermined the credibility of the accomplice, it also included in its consideration other circumstances that provided reasonable doubt as … To qualify as hearsay, the statement, oral or written, must be offered to establish the truth of the matter asserted. People v. Simms, 143 Ill. 2d 154, 173 (1991); R.

National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford v. Kilfoy

Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 13, 2007

Weller were not clearly defined and that, as a result, Weller evaluated and advised patients who should have been evaluated and advised by Sondheimer. … properly advised by Weller; (6) scheduling surgeries in such a manner to discourage patients from seeking additional preoperative advice from Sondheimer; (7) failing to require written consent by patients; and (8) failing to establish

Bartholome v. Phillips

311 Ill. 600 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1924

In a qualified sense that is correct, but, especially in a will contest, the bare statement of the rule without any qualification is misleading. … All the law governing the issue tried could be stated much more clearly in a few instructions than in a large number.

People v. Crawford

23 Ill. App. 3d 398 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 6, 1974

We agree and hold that the testimony heard on the motion to suppress clearly supports the trial judge’s finding of probable cause, and that the officers clearly had reasonable grounds to believe that an offense was being … Defendant’s argument in this regard is clearly without merit.

Evergreen Real Estate Services, LLC v. Hanover Insurance Co.

2019 IL App (1st) 181867 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 4, 2019

Hanover Insurance argues that the RLTO qualifies as a “local consumer protection law.” … Here, there is room for reasonable disagreement about whether the RLTO qualifies as a “consumer protection law.” ¶ 26 To say that the RLTO is clearly and unequivocally a consumer protection law, we would

Hubbard v. Sherman Hospital

292 Ill. App. 3d 148 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 26, 1997

Malachinski did not testify to sufficient experience to qualify him as a surgical expert. Northern Trust, 213 Ill. App. 3d at 407 , again provides guidance. Dr. … A verdict against the manifest weight of the evidence is one that is "palpably erroneous and wholly unwarranted, is clearly the result of passion or prejudice, or appears to be arbitrary, unreasonable, and not based on the

Williams v. Butler

35 Ill. App. 3d 532 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 30, 1976

however, and the decisions under the Administrative Review Act to the effect that the findings of an administrative agency wiU not be reversed or set aside unless they are against the manifest weight of the evidence would clearly … Pollution Control Board, 27 Ill.App.3d 949 , 328 N.E.2d 571 , the well-established rule was stated to be as follows: “This court may overturn the decision of an administrative agency on review only if we find that the decision

Rice v. Marathon Petroleum Corp.

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

an Underground Storage Tank Fund intended to be a State fund by which persons who qualify for access to the Underground Storage Tank Fund may satisfy the financial responsibility requirements … If the legislature had intended to create an express private right of action, it clearly knows how to do so.

Schussler v. Employment Consultants, Inc.

333 F. Supp. 1387 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 22, 1971

That it was the intent of Congress to exclude such businesses from the term “retail or service establishment” is clearly demonstrated by the legislative history of the 1949 amendments and by judicial construction given said … Such establishments not having been traditionally regarded as retail or service establishments cannot under any circumstances qualify as a “retail or service establishment” within the statutory definition.

People v. Siemens Building Technologies

Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 24, 2008

However, the State’s contention that section 35 “is clearly the ‘true up’ where the documented savings are compared with the annual payment and the provider is required to ‘pay the difference’ ” is not what the statute … Qualified providers means people that are qualified, yes, to do the energy conservation work, but we also want qualified lenders. We clarify this in the bill.

Cichocki v. Foxx

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 23, 2021

The Complaint does not clearly describe the events that followed this October 13, 2017 hearing. … Cichocki responds to this well-established doctrine by asserting that that Judge Greenblatt is not entitled to absolute judicial immunity because he did not have subject matter jurisdiction.

People v. Agee

100 Ill. App. 3d 878 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 24, 1981

The court also stated, with respect to trial after an unlawful arrest, a defendant “cannot claim immunity from prosecution simply because his appearance in court was precipitated by an unlawful arrest. … The trial court clearly considered the conflicting testimony in assessing Shields’.credibility as an identification witness.

Justice v. TOWN OF CICERO, ILL.

827 F. Supp. 2d 835 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 25, 2011

immunity shields Dominick from liability for damages; and (6) the Illinois Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act bars all claims for monetary relief. … City of Chicago, 651 F.3d 684 (7th Cir.2011), clearly implicates important constitutional rights. The Seventh Circuit, however, issued its decision in Justice’s previously case after the Supreme Court decided Heller.

Gowdy v. Richter

20 Ill. App. 3d 514 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 20, 1974

Since the evidence adduced at trial clearly showed that a certificate for 200 shares of stock had been issued to Mr. and Mrs. … The statute clearly reads that liability is established if either of the findings is correct.

Blank v. Swan

487 F. Supp. 452 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 25, 1980

First, he claims that he is absolutely immune from liability arising out of any defamatory statements made by him. … While Swan’s position would seem to entitle him to invoke the immunity defense established by Blair v. Walker, 64 Ill.2d 1 , 349 N.E.2d 385 (1976), and its progeny, see, e. g., Ware v.

Bourland v. Snyder

224 Ill. 478 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1906

, did not contain the requisite number of qualified petitioners to give the board jurisdiction of the matter, and that therefore jurisdiction was lacking in the board, composed of the county superintendents of the respective … The power given by clause i of section 47 to divide a district clearly conferred authority to erect the divided part or parts into separate, complete districts, otherwise a portion of the district so divided would be without

Doe v. Macleod

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2023

To defeat a qualified immunity defense by a state official, a plaintiff must show “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right; and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of … To defeat the Defendants’ qualified immunity defense, the Plaintiff has the burden of demonstrating that the alleged violation of her Eighth Amendment right was “clearly established.” Id.