Case law

Mayol v. Summers, Watson & Kimpel

223 Ill. App. 3d 794 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 16, 1992

An attorney’s act or omission that is an error of judgment does not necessarily establish liability for malpractice. … Given the conflicting testimony, we do not find clearly evident a conclusion opposite that reached by the jury.

Wuerttemberger v. Continental Casualty Co.

32 Ill. App. 2d 430 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 24, 1961

BURKE, J., dissenting: The rule is well established that where provisions of an insurance policy are inconsistent or ambiguous, they are to be construed liberally in favor of the insured. … The language in the policy clearly informs the insured of the benefits he can expect and defines the risk undertaken by the insurer.

Embraer S.A. v. Dougherty Air Tr., LLC

348 F. Supp. 3d 246 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Dec 12, 2018

all parties in interest and that the legal and factual bases set forth establish[ed] just cause." … The timeline of events clearly establish this standard met in the present case. Dougherty sent its Revised Claim to Shuttle's bankruptcy representative on January 20, 2017. Verde Ex. 18.

City of Champaign v. Department of Revenue

89 Ill. App. 3d 1066 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 31, 1980

The tax monies at issue in the instant case were clearly distributed under a mistake of fact, i.e., the location of the two establishments. … Stat. 1979, ch. 120, par. 443), or the two-year period contained in the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (111. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 85, par. 8 — 101).

In re Katarzyna G.

2013 IL App (2d) 120807 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 15, 2013

“A judgment is against the manifest weight of the evidence when the opposite conclusion is clearly evident, plain, and indisputable.” … The notice referred to in section 2-102(a-5) of the Code certainly qualifies as a statement or explanation that must be given to a respondent.

Chaudhary v. Department of Human Services

2023 IL 127712 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 20, 2023

Thus, the code clearly indicated that the burden was on the party challenging the allegations in the notice. … ¶ 98 Although it is true that the Secretary’s decisions should be afforded considerable weight, they are not immune from review.

Hedgepeth v. Britton

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 20, 2024

Qualified Immunity Defendants also move for summary judgment on a qualified immunity defense. [53] at 14–15. … Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity unless their conduct violated a constitutional right that was “clearly established” at the time. See Tousis v. Billiot, 84 F.4th 692, 697 (7th Cir. 2023).

CARO EX REL. STATE v. Blagojevich

385 Ill. App. 3d 704 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 26, 2008

ANALYSIS To establish entitlement to preliminary injunctive relief, a plaintiff must show (1) a clearly ascertainable right in need of protection, (2) that he will suffer irreparable harm without protection of that right, … More clearly, though, the trial court’s order states that plaintiffs “seek to enjoin the FamilyCare Program,” not just a portion of it.

Palmetto Leasing Co. v. Chiles

235 Ill. App. 3d 986 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 14, 1992

Thus, the record does not reflect a binding intention to pay $9,000 on defendants’ part and does not clearly establish a contract with definite terms. … The record does not clearly show that the parties intended that defendants be bound.

T. E. Hill Co. v. Contractors Supply & Equipment Co.

156 Ill. App. 270 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 3, 1910

This clearly does not mean by any court, but by the bankruptcy court. In other words, the' new right is not to sue for damages, but to have damages allowed in the bankruptcy proceedings by the bankruptcy court. … R. 73, at page 76: “Upon the filing of the petition for an adjudication of bankruptcy against the corporation and service of process, jurisdiction over parties and subject-matter was established (Denver First National Bank

Bernales v. Cook County

139 F. Supp. 2d 927 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 16, 2001

Plaintiff initially argues that he should have received the promotion to the chairman position because he was clearly more qualified than Dr. Moy, and that he could have demonstrated this fact if Dr. … The court finds that Plaintiff cannot establish a prima facie case of discrimination with respect to his promotion claim because he cannot establish that he was qualified for the chairman position and that Dr.

People Ex Rel. Barrett v. Anderson

398 Ill. 480 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 26, 1947

Anderson, county clerk of Iroquois County, to require him to comply with the provisions of the recent Reapportionment Act, entitled “An Act to apportion the State of Illinois into twenty-six Congressional districts and to establish … The petitioner claims the intention of the legislature is clearly indicated, and that it undertook to, and did include all of the territory of the State of Illinois within the several districts, and that the same are clearly

Gonzalez-Loza v. Downey

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 22, 2023

The defendants argue in the alternative that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Even if the defendants had not waived this defense, the Court would conclude that they are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Desai v. General Growth Properties, Inc.

654 F. Supp. 2d 836 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 17, 2009

But Asher does not establish a bright-line rule that would eliminate safe harbor protection for a company that clearly discloses the important risk factors but does not later update its investors in real time about its various … Freibaum’s statement that certain potential loans “could possibly aggregate $1.5 billion or even more” was clearly forward-looking.

Ruiz v. The City of Chicago

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 29, 2006

Ligouri was qualified as an American Heart Association pediatric advanced life support provider. … However, as discussed below, we do not find this to be the case and review the trial court=s decision to exclude Ligouri under an abuse of discretion standard as clearly outlined in Gill and Sullivan.

Brotherhood of Maintenance Way Employees v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co.

383 F. Supp. 2d 1000 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 1, 2005

The parties clearly disagree on the outcome of that determination, and as explained in Brown , this is a potentially dispositive issue. 254 F.3d at 661 . … .,” BMWE’s concession prevents them from establishing that the plaintiffs are qualified individuals entitled to relief under the ADA.

Vincent Mar. v. Metro-North R.R. Co.

369 F. Supp. 3d 525 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 28, 2019

He also does not dispute that employees making Good Faith Challenges are immune from disciplinary action. … City of New York , 374 F.3d 93 , 109 (2d Cir. 2004) (in context of qualified immunity, it was appropriate for court to determine whether "defendant official's conduct was objectively reasonable" as a matter of law).

In Re Estate of Snodgrass

336 Ill. App. 3d 619 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 7, 2003

If the legislature intended the statute to mean what respondent argues it means, the legislature could have easily said so by inserting a single but highly significant qualifying word: “paternal.” … On its face, section 2 — 4(d)(1) does not “clearly require” us to hold that petitioners have no right of heirship from decedent.

The PEOPLE v. Palmer

31 Ill. 2d 58 · Illinois Supreme Court · May 20, 1964

clearly establish actual incompetency of counsel and substantial prejudice resulting therefrom, without which the outcome would probably have been different. … It was established that someone entered this closed and locked tavern building and assaulted Herman Kampe.

Marchioni v. Board of Educ. of City of Chicago

341 F. Supp. 2d 1036 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 25, 2004

Hassan also argues two bases for immunity from tort liability for his statements: (1) section 2-201 of the Illinois Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act ("Tort Immunity Act”), 745 ILCS 10/2-201, … and (2) common law immunity for gov-eminent officials acting within the scope of their duties.