Case law

United States v. Santos

65 F. Supp. 2d 802 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 8, 1999

The testimony was sufficiently specific to establish the frequency of the conduct, and it establishes more than a mere tendency to act in a given manner. … “A party establishes a foundation for admission , of , business records when it demonstrates through the testimony of a qualified witness that the records were kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity

Armstrong v. United Insurance Co. of America

98 Ill. App. 3d 1132 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 30, 1981

He admitted on cross-examination that the mere fact somebody was unemployed did not necessarily mean they would not qualify for insurance. … The words of the receipt do not clearly counter this assumption.

General Motors Corporation v. State of Illinois Motor Vehicle Review Board

Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 8, 2007

If a protest is filed, the manufacturer has the burden of proof to establish that “good cause” exists to allow the grant or establishment of the additional franchise. 815 ILCS 710/4(e)(8) (West 2004). … Whether the Board’s Decision Was Clearly Erroneous GMC next argues that the Board’s decision was either clearly erroneous or against the manifest weight of the evidence.

Davis v. Board of Education of Waukegan Community Unit School District No. 60

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 13, 2020

immunity. … Defendants also argue that Plascencia is entitled to a qualified privilege for statements made at a Board meeting. See Krasinski v.

Baruxen v. Hacker

2025 IL App (5th) 240701 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 11, 2025

The Concealed Carry Act allows qualified individuals to obtain a license to carry concealed handguns in public. … Plaintiffs argue that the plain language of subsections (c)(2) and (d) of section 5 of the Civil Rights Act (740 ILCS 23/5(c)(2), (d) (West 2022)) clearly indicates that they are eligible to recover these fees and costs

City of Wheaton v. Sandberg

215 Ill. App. 3d 220 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 3, 1991

Clearly, in this instance, the City’s exercise of eminent domain is a valid home-rule power. We must now determine whether the legislature has specifically limited or preempted this power. … Accordingly, the defendants’ argument regarding the uniform standards established by the Act must fail. II.

Davis v. Keystone Printing Service, Inc.

111 Ill. App. 3d 427 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 30, 1982

That section clearly includes affirmative defenses. (Millsaps v. Bankers Life Co. (1976), 35 Ill. App. 3d 735, 742 , appeal denied (1976), 63 Ill. 2d 552 .) … The court decided that it “need not in this case decide whether plaintiff was a public figure or public official, because the facts justify following Farnsworth and holding that this case clearly qualifies under the Butts

People v. Smith

63 Ill. App. 2d 369 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 5, 1965

If A’s testimony is offered for the purpose of establishing that B said this, it is clearly admissible—if offered to prove that event X occurred, it is clearly inadmissible, for the only probative value rests in B’s knowledge—and … The admission of the defendant of the prior inconsistent statement was not sufficiently qualified to permit- or require rebuttal.

Geekie v. Owen (In Re Owen)

74 B.R. 697 · United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. Illinois · Jun 18, 1987

The statute clearly establishes that homestead is an estate, and that the individual entitled to the estate must either own the property to which the estate attaches, or rightly possess the property by lease or otherwise. … For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that the number of exemptions available is to be determined by the number of individuals in title who qualify for the homestead estate.

Spidle v. Steward

79 Ill. 2d 1 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 22, 1980

Yellow Cab Co. (1975), 61 Ill. 2d 416, 421 , for example, this court held the doctrine inapplicable as a matter of law because the evidence introduced by the plaintiff clearly established that the defendant did not have control … 1971) relevant to the causes of action based upon negligence: “In treating and operating upon a patient, a doctor must possess and apply the knowledge and use the skill and care that is ordinarily used by reasonably well-qualified

Bailey v. State of Ill.

622 F. Supp. 504 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 11, 1985

Otherwise, a state could manufacture immunity for its employees by agreeing to indemnify them. See Spruytte, 753 F.2d at 512 n. 6; Demery, 735 F.2d at 1146-47 ; Terry v. … was not clearly foreshadowed.

Mooney v. Etheridge

65 Ill. App. 3d 847 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 8, 1978

It is well established in Illinois that “ ‘the violation of a statute or ordinance designed for the protection of human life or property is prima facie evidence of negligence.’ ” (Davis v. … We believe that the policy consideration clearly remains the same both before and after the client testifies.

Ramsey v. United States

448 F. Supp. 1264 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 17, 1978

Persons proceeding in forma pauperis are immune from imposition of costs if they are unsuccessful; and because of their poverty, they are practically immune from later tort actions for “malicious prosecution” or abuse of … Although the waiver aspect of Rule 51 is well-established and although its terms clearly negate the view that objections are unnecessary, it does not explicitly or expressly provide that failure to object at trial constitutes

Craig v. Hardy

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 2018

Qualified Immunity The Court next considers Defendants’ affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … “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

People v. Blanks Opinion on Rehearing Opinion corrected on 12/01/05

Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 2005

“A lesser-included offense” is defined as an offense that “ ‘[i]s established by proof of the same or less than all of the facts or a less culpable mental state (or both), than that which is required to establish the commission … Defendant next asserts that the burglary indictment gave him no notice that he qualified for sentencing as a Class X offender or qualified for an extended term.

Palier v. Dreis & Krump Manufacturing Co.

81 Ill. App. 2d 1 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 27, 1967

Essentially, this theory of indemnity has found its way into Illinois law because of this State’s long established refusal to allow contribution among tortfeasors who acted in pari delicto. … New City further maintains that its indemnity action is separate and apart from the Scaffold Act and the immunities granted employees thereunder.

Moore v. P & G-CLAIROL, INC.

781 F. Supp. 2d 694 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 18, 2011

Moriarty rely upon plaintiffs treating physicians ... to establish medical causation”).) … The treating physicians are not qualified to opine that the dye is unreasonably dangerous and Moriarty is not qualified to conclude that the dye caused plaintiffs’ injuries from a medical perspective.

Ryan v. Commonwealth Edison Co.

381 Ill. App. 3d 877 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 28, 2008

The court explained: “[T]he statute singles out the architect and the contractor, and grants them immunity. *** The arbitrary quality of the statute clearly appears when we consider that architects and contractors are not … In point of fact, we note that this duty derived from its capacity as the power supplier and not from its status as installer of the system. 2 It is well established that power suppliers have an ongoing duty to inspect and

Ayala v. Murad

Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 12, 2006

“If there is a malignant tumor with a lot of invasion and some other worrisome features, the patient clearly goes to chemotherapy or *** some other form of therapy to try to stop this tumor from growing and metastasizing … The party seeking reversal has the burden of establishing prejudice. Israel, 276 Ill. App. 3d at 463.

Oakridge Development v. Property Tax Appeal

938 N.E.2d 533 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 15, 2010

However, petitioners by their own admission do not qualify for special treatment under section 10-30. … Second, although the legislature removed the recapture provision, it included language that quite clearly indicates an intent that present use and two years' prior use as a farm were both required to qualify property for