Case law

Russ v. Watts

190 F. Supp. 2d 1094 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 15, 2002

Bell clearly holds that, “under present constitutional authorities the siblings cannot recover under [§ ]1983.” 746 F.2d at 1248. … Thus, Hudson is clearly distinguished from the instant case.

Scammon v. Commercial Union Ins.

20 Ill. App. 500 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 3, 1887

It is indisputable that, as respects every other matter, the plaintiff’s cause of action was clearly made out, so that, upon this appeal, the only questions demanding consideration are those arising upon the above stated … All the material facts are, however, established by undisputed evidence.

Moorhead v. Lane

125 F.R.D. 680 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Apr 29, 1989

The court went on to hold that this policy supported a “qualified privilege subject to necessity____” Id. at 739 , 112 Ill.Dec. 802 , 514 N.E.2d 465 . … The court’s research has not found a Seventh Circuit precedent that establishes an executive predecisional deliberative process privilege for state agencies.

In re Marriage of Morreale

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 16, 2004

In such event, any balance due and owing will be paid into a trust to be established by MARY ELLEN for the benefit of the parties' children. … Mary Ellen argues that the agreement clearly shows that the payments are a property settlement and, therefore, are not income for tax purposes.

Jones Truck Lines, Inc. v. Republic Tobacco, Inc.

178 B.R. 999 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 2, 1995

The ICC subsequently established a procedural schedule in the proceeding to determine rate reasonableness. … However, the legislative history clearly reveals the opposite conclusion.

Lyons Township ex rel Kielczynski v. Village of Indian Head Park

2017 IL App (1st) 161574 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 23, 2017

Clearly, a qui tam action would not be brought on behalf of a government entity engaging in fraud, or any other random government unit with no ties to the claim. … by the Tort Immunity Act

Boffa v. Department of Public Aid

168 Ill. App. 3d 139 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 16, 1988

Department recouped payment made to plaintiff for prophylaxis during the 1981 audited period, based upon his billing practices, and explained to plaintiff that his records insufficiently documented that treatment so as to qualify … In each case, the evidence was clearly insufficient to support Department action. Rather, this case is analogous to Meyers v. Department of Public Aid, 114 Ill.

Sycamore Community Unit School District No. 427 v. Illinois Property Tax Appeal Board

2014 IL App (2d) 130055 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 12, 2014

we assume, for purposes of this analysis only, that the property was properly platted in 2007 (Dahl and the PTAB promote this position, whereas De Kalb asserts that Dahl did not meet his burden of proof in establishing … A decision is deemed “clearly erroneous” only where the reviewing court, upon consideration of the entire record, is left with the definite and firm conviction that an error has been made.

People v. Miles

133 Ill. App. 2d 599 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 15, 1971

While a police report may so qualify, it must be shown that the report contains some substantially verbatim statement in order to compel its production at the time of the witness’ cross-examination. (See People v. … The crimes involved were clearly distinct, required different elements of proof, and were perpetrated on two different victims. The attempt to rob Mrs. Gary was completed prior to the attack on the police officer.

People v. Valdez

2016 IL 119860 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 26, 2017

This advice was clearly incorrect, according to the Supreme Court. In fact, Padilla’s drug conviction subjected him to mandatory deportation from the country. … Padilla, 559 U.S. at 368-69.2 Consequently, where the face of 1 The appellate court held defendant’s conviction did not qualify as an aggravated felony under the federal immigration statutes

Klose v. Mende Modified on Denial of Rehearing - replaces opinion filed December 7, 2001 Opinion text corrected May 24, 2002

Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 18, 2002

At a minimum, however, a valid order needs to incorporate as much of the survey as necessary to clearly indicate the courses and distances of the route of the road and the land over which it passes. … The common and ordinary use establishing the right to an easement by prescription limits and qualifies it so that it cannot be given to different uses and purposes.

In Re Marriage of Mass

102 Ill. App. 3d 984 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 23, 1981

The difficulty with her assertion was that the agreement clearly designated the payments to be for her support and not the children’s. … In discussing this issue, we must recognize that the parties clearly intended for Alfredo’s duty to make the payments to continue despite the fact of Carolee’s remarriage.

Cicmanec v. Department of Registration & Education

182 Ill. App. 3d 710 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 24, 1989

A foreign student is qualified to take the exam after attending medical school for two years. … For a judgment to be contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence, an opposite conclusion must be clearly evident. (United Air Lines, Inc. v. Illinois Fair Employment Practices Comm’n, 69 Ill.

People v. Wills

71 Ill. 2d 138 · Illinois Supreme Court · Mar 23, 1978

On May 16, 1974, Casper, under a grant of immunity, detailed what had happened for the grand jury. … and succeeded them. “ ‘A charge of perjury may not be sustained by the device of lifting a statement of the accused out of its immediate context *** thus giving it a meaning wholly different than that which its context clearly

Cloutier v. Gojet Airlines, LLC

311 F. Supp. 3d 928 · District Court, E.D. Illinois · May 15, 2018

GoJet argues that Cloutier's ADA discrimination claim fails because (1) he cannot establish that he is a qualified individual with a disability within the meaning of the ADA, (2) he cannot show that his disability was a but-for … To defeat summary judgment on an ADA discrimination claim that alleges disparate treatment, a plaintiff must point to evidence sufficient to establish that (1) he is a qualified individual with a disability within the meaning

In re S.S. Nunc Pro Tunc to Dec. 6, 2000

322 Ill. App. 3d 81 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 25, 2001

The record establishes that respondent and her husband Francisco S. were both deaf and spoke through sign language. … The court concluded that respondent clearly did. not wish to confront issues regarding harm to her children.

Farris v. Kohl

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Feb 13, 2023

The undisputed record establishes that IDOC’s rule is a blanket ban. … In her view, the undisputed facts establish that IDOC “believed—correctly or incorrectly—that [Ms.

Trexler v. City of Belvidere

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 10, 2021

However, when qualified immunity defenses are raised, it is possible that a jury could credit those defenses without foreclosing a plaintiff’s Monell claims. See Scott v. … Mar. 30, 2018). 3 Courts in this district commonly deny bifurcation of Monell claims, at least in part, because the defendant officers asserted the defense of qualified immunity.

Rowry v. Litigation Solutions, Inc.

82 F. Supp. 2d 928 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 8, 2000

Rowry was clearly capable of devoting his energies to a business venture and he was not suffering from any disability at the time of his discharge. Rowry was unhappy with his working situation at LSI. … Rather, the record clearly established that Plaintiff was terminated because he was not meeting his employer’s expectations as a salesman.

Morton Community Unit School District No. 709 v. J.M.

986 F. Supp. 1112 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Oct 23, 1997

Citing Tatro , the Level I Hearing Officer concluded that since the record established that J.M. only required the assistance of a “nurse or another qualified person” and not a physician, J.M. did not require “medical services … The Court of Appeals was clearly correct in holding that CIC is a “supportive servic[e] ... required to assist a handicapped child to benefit from special education.”