Case law

Pierce v. People

106 Ill. 11 · Illinois Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1883

This proposition is so clearly settled by the authorities, it can no longer be regarded as an open question. … If he was not the agent, and did not aid. the insurance company in violation of the statute, which I am satisfied the evidence fails to establish, the judgment ought to be reversed.

Suburban 1, Inc. v. GHS MORTGAGE, LLC

358 Ill. App. 3d 769 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 20, 2005

Two days before the Jiangs accepted the Sullivans’ offer, Kevin Morse, branch manager of Windsor Mortgage, signed a letter stating that the Sullivans qualified and were approved for financing of 90% of the sale price of the … A cause of action will not be dismissed on the pleadings unless it clearly appears that no set of facts can be proved that will entitle the plaintiff to relief. Van Horne v. Muller, 185 Ill. 2d 299, 305 (1998).

Albarran v. Dart

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 17, 2024

Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability for damages in the performance of his duties unless the official violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person … Dec. 27, 2020) (finding Dart entitled to qualified immunity); Ross v. Russell, Case No. 7:20-cv-000774, 2022 WL 767093, *14 (W.D.

Ruehman v. Village of Palos Park

842 F. Supp. 1043 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 21, 1994

Puerto Rico Aqueduct applies to Eleventh Amendment immunity the reasoning of Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985), as to interlocutory appeals of denials of qualified immunity. … Even without further rulings in this case on the merits of the claims against Pucinski, there may, now or in the future, be clearly established law so that individual damages claims against Clerk’s office personnel can be

Marconi v. Chicago Heights Police Pension Board

Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 19, 2005

The question of whether a police officer qualifies for a disability pension involves an examination of the legal effect of a given set of facts. … As discussed, we have already decided to reverse the Pension Board's decision as clearly erroneous.

Adamczyk v. Lever Brothers Co.

33 F. Supp. 2d 679 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 27, 1998

An employer’s unfunded provision for severance benefits can qualify as a welfare benefit plan under ERISA. Young v. … Clearly, the last three elements are satisfied.

Brown

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 30, 2026

A court can deny a qualified plaintiff leave to file IFP or can dismiss a case if the action is clearly frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or is a claim for money damages against an immune defendant. 28 … Plaintiff’s claims under the Illinois eavesdropping statute (720 ILCS 5/14) fail to state a claim under § 1983 because a violation of state law, standing alone, does not establish a violation of the U.S.

Pochie v. Cook County Officers Electoral Board

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 25, 1997

qualified, legal and registered voter at that address." … We further disagree with petitioner's argument that the petition and the records of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners clearly indicate that Pochie does have standing.

Eumana v. Gomanji

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 17, 2025

immunity. … Alternatively, Defendants contend that Dart is shielded by the doctrine of qualified immunity. Id.

Lombardo v. Reliance Elevator Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 30, 2000

But the failures of the bank and the maintenance company do not establish a defense for WS against plaintiff 's claim. Rather, they establish grounds for WS's counterclaims. … The burden of establishing the qualifications of an expert witness is on the proponent of his testimony, and it is within the discretion of the trial court to determine whether the witness has been qualified.

Ickes v. Ickes

386 Ill. 19 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1944

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

Grutzius v. Armour & Co. of Delaware, Inc.

312 Ill. App. 366 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 30, 1941

In the Parks case it was said at page 114 that “the General Assembly has failed to establish a standard or rule of action.” … It seems perfectly obvious that the word “provided” was used in its ordinary sense and that the legislature clearly intended to qualify the word negligence appearing in the first part of section 3 to mean negligence as defined

People v. Krone

98 Ill. App. 3d 619 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 28, 1981

This goes to the weight to be given the inference of guilt and is clearly a matter for the trier of fact to determine. … Controlling here is the rule that the details of a police radio broadcast are admissible to establish that the officer went to the area of the crime because of the broadcast, but not to prove the truth of the statements contained

MBA Enterprises, Inc. v. Northern Illinois Gas Co.

307 Ill. App. 3d 285 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 31, 1999

The plaintiffs’ complaint alleges a number of negligent acts by NI Gas that clearly fall within the purview of installation and construction of the piping system. … Finally, the question decided on appeal in Cates was whether the defendant met its burden of establishing that a cold rolling mill was an improvement to real property.

Harms v. Wuerth

396 Ill. 73 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1947

The ordinance is also clearly in violation of section 29 of article VI of the constitution of Illinois, which provides: “All judicial officers shall be commissioned by the governor. … It will readily be observed the purpose of this provision of the constitution is to establish uniformity of proceedings of courts of the same class or grade.

City of Des Plaines v. Scientific MacHinery Movers, Inc.

9 Ill. App. 3d 438 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 19, 1972

Before the enactment of this provision, consent decrees could be collaterally attacked only through bills of review and were specifically immune from challenges by appeal or writ of error. (Sims v. … Evanston Bus Co., 27 Ill.2d 609 , 190 N.E.2d 348 , and the policy enunciated by the court there clearly establishes that the courts are not strictly bound by precedent in affording post-judgment relief, but rather may exercise

Sansone v. Donahoe

98 F. Supp. 3d 946 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 14, 2015

Standard of Review Every Rule 56 movant bears the burden of establishing the absence of any genuine issue of material fact (Celotex Corp. v. … On that premise Sansone was not a “qualified individual” who was entitled at that point to a reasonable accommodation.

Sterigenics U.S., LLC v. Kim

385 F. Supp. 3d 600 · District Court, E.D. Illinois · May 3, 2019

Courts have construed this language broadly to confer sovereign immunity upon the states, which "guarantees that an unconsenting State is immune from suits brought in federal courts by her own citizens as well as by citizens … Accordingly, both sovereign immunity and the lack of any federal question mandate dismissal of this action.

Riordan v. Department of Registration & Education

205 Ill. App. 3d 344 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 17, 1990

Maher was qualified to testify. Nor would such a contention be tenable, given the standards of review applicable to the circuit court and this court in administrative review cases. … In this cause the Board clearly chose to accept Dr. Maher’s testimony and rejected the limited testimony of Dr. Riordan and Dr. Oses.

People v. Beller

74 Ill. 2d 514 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1979

Walker, originally a co-defendant in the trial, testified for the State under a statutory grant of immunity (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 38, par. 106—1 et seq.). … This case does not fall within that exception, however, because the purpose of the prosecutor’s remarks here was clearly to impeach defendant’s testimony that he bought the stolen goods from Walker, and not to impeach testimony