Case law

Steele v. Provena Hospitals

996 N.E.2d 711 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 24, 2013

Moran was clearly deficient when he could or did not” was made explicit when counsel asked Dr. Ortinau: “Q. He [Dr. … He thereby established his familiarity with emergency room practice and satisfied the second requirement.

Rouse v. Judges of Circuit Court of Cook County

609 F. Supp. 243 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 21, 1985

The C.B.A. clearly performs many functions in screening and recommending candidates for judicial office solely as a private association. … The ballot contains the names of two qualified candidates for each available position. Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 110A, § 39.

Geary v. Dominick's Finer Foods, Inc.

129 Ill. 2d 389 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1989

Defendants argue that plaintiffs cannot establish duress merely by pleading that tampons and sanitary napkins are necessities. … Cosmetics, such as lipsticks, perfume and hair tonics do not qualify for the reduced rate.” (86 Ill. Adm. Code §130.310 (1985).)

People v. Hilliard

457 Ill. Dec. 439 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 7, 2021

Louisiana clarified that Miller established both a substantive and a procedural requirement. 577 U.S. 190, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016). … Buffer aside, clearly, the defendant’s 40-year sentence was not Miller’s “life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

Irizarry v. Illinois Central Railroad Company

377 Ill. App. 3d 486 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 21, 2007

In that case, plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of section 5(a) of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act, which appeared to confer immunity to general contractors from actions for damages by injured employees … Where a right to such a cause of action has not been established, there can be no basis upon which to claim a constitutional deprivation of a vested property right.

Alsup v. 3-Day Blinds, Inc.

435 F. Supp. 2d 838 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jun 8, 2006

The basic purpose of section 1442 is to ensure a federal forum for defenses of official immunity by federal officers. See Willingham v. … In doing so, the court noted the potential limitations of a defense of official immunity under the facts of the case.

Pursley v. City of Rockford

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 4, 2024

that Gunnell violated a clearly established right. … But as Pursley explains, he disagrees with Gunnell’s dismissal because the Court found that he had failed to respond to the ISP defendants’ qualified immunity argument.

Riching Corp. v. Daley

43 Ill. App. 3d 574 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 22, 1976

Stat. 1971, and therefore, does not qualify to hold a retail liquor license in the State of Illinois, contrary to Chap. 43, §142, Ill. Rev. … While the Liquor Control Act does not specifically require that the restaurant business be the principal business,, the statute does clearly forbid the sale of alcoholic liquor except with meals.

Lombard Park District v. Chicago Title & Trust Co.

103 Ill. App. 2d 1 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 27, 1968

Rogers, supra, 112, 113 , specifically approved the reasoning of the Becker case and stated that the reasonable probability of rezoning is a proper factor to consider in establishing value. … We agree, however, with the trial court that the expert witnesses for the defendants stated sufficient relevant factors to support their belief concerning a reasonable probability of rezoning the property to qualify the admission

Romiti v. Kerner

256 F. Supp. 35 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 30, 1966

Philip Romiti, a resident of Cook County, Illinois, which comprises the present first judicial district of Illinois, has brought suit as a taxpayer of Illinois and the United States and as a qualified voter in Cook County … The result has been a complete reorganization of entire judicial system in Illinois, with the establishment of an adequate system of administrative control.

Lewis v. Kalbhen

2025 IL App (1st) 242110 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 10, 2025

¶ 16 The absolute litigation privilege immunizes statements by attorneys during the course of litigation. Goodman v. Goodman, 2023 IL App (2d) 220086, ¶ 25. … Clearly, then, the report was pertinent to the divorce litigation and was protected under the absolute litigation privilege.

Smith ex rel. Smith v. Meeks

225 F. Supp. 3d 696 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 5, 2016

A child with ADHD may qualify as a child with a disability 3 who is eligible to receive an IEP, if his condition adversely affects his educational performance from an academic standpoint. See generally A.J. v. … Nevertheless, she concluded that G.C.’s father clearly had educational decision-making authority because he had custody of G.C.

County of Peoria v. Illinois State Labor Relations Board

305 Ill. App. 3d 827 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 22, 1999

Thus, we review under the clearly erroneous standard because it is a mixed question of law and fact. … (Ill.) par. 2030, the Board refused to fragment a well-established bargaining unit that could result in employees obtaining different terms and conditions of employment than their fellow unit members.

People v. Jones

2016 IL 119391 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 26, 2017

establish that he had been adjudicated delinquent of residential burglary. … Although defendant points out that prior to trial he denied having a prior adjudication for residential burglary, he clearly abandoned that claim at sentencing.

United States Gypsum Co. v. Lafarge North America Inc.

670 F. Supp. 2d 748 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 27, 2009

Morton’s testimony, however, clearly refutes this charge. … In order to establish the extent of his damages, a plaintiff bears the burden of showing a lack of acceptable substitutes.

Golden Rule Insurance v. Schwartz

203 Ill. 2d 456 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 24, 2003

In other words, the contract, “by its own terms, established a lesser knowledge standard” than that required by the statute. Green, 704 So. 2d at 1391 . … and belief] require[ ] that knowledge not defy belief ***. *** What the applicant in fact believed to be true is the determining factor in judging the truth or falsity of his answer, but only so far as that belief is not clearly

Chicago South Shore & South Bend Railroad v. Monon Railroad

235 F. Supp. 984 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 17, 1964

We are asked to usurp the function of a specialized agency uniquely qualified to deal with these matters. We •cannot, and will not act. … That case may be distinguished, as the Court clearly indicated the scope of its decision.

Sigma Companies, Inc. v. Regas

255 Ill. App. 3d 857 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 1993

If plaintiff can establish that the solicitation of an interested party occurred during the period of time covered by the agreement, plaintiff is entitled to recovery. … Defendant further contends, however, that the buyer’s deposition clearly established that plaintiff did not solicit the buyer and that the buyer knew that the business was for sale prior to the meeting with plaintiff.

City of Evanston v. O'LEARY

244 Ill. App. 3d 190 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 16, 1993

The Act is clearly within the class of remedial statutes which are designed to grant remedies for the protection of rights, introduce regulation conducive to the public good, or cure public evils. [Citations.] … The Act is designed in some measure to provide protection to persons who rent premises to establish a residence.

Clark v. Lindsay Light & Chemical Co.

341 Ill. App. 316 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 1, 1950

Lindsay Light & Chemical Co., 393 Ill. 367 , did not in any way qualify the law as to the old common law rights and that this last cited case simply decided that where one obtained a law judgment for the sum of $1.00, this … To warrant the allowance of the writ of injunction it must clearly appear that some act has been done or is threatened against the plaintiff which will produce an irreparable injury to him. (Cleveland v.