Case law

Barlick v. Kunz

375 Ill. 318 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1940

Three qualified voters of the township were permitted to file their intervening petition alleging that they voted for appellant and seeking an order directing the judges of election to initial their ballots so that they might … The initialing requirement, it is established, is mandatory, (Lacy v. Rhodes, 369 Ill. 167 ; Sibley v. Staiger, 347 id. 288 ;) it applies to the ballots of absent voters (Greene v. Bjorseth, 350 Ill. 469 ; McCreery v.

County of Du Page v. Illinois Labor Relations Board, State Panel

375 Ill. App. 3d 765 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 24, 2007

We first consider the well-established principles guiding our review of the issues raised on appeal. … It is not proper for the court to depart from the plain language of the statute by reading into it exceptions, limitations, or conditions that conflict with the legislature’s clearly expressed intent. Harroun, 372 Ill.

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.

Johnson v. Chicago Transit Authority

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 23, 2020

“To establish disability discrimination, a plaintiff must prove that, (1) she [has a disability] within the meaning of the ADA, (2) she is qualified to perform the essential functions of the job, either with or without … Plaintiff’s diagnosis of an overactive bladder clearly involves the operation of a major bodily function specifically included under the definition of a major life activity.

People v. Dunn

Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 8, 2001

In addition, the court is not immune from knowledge of the nature of an area in the city. See People v. Mack , 17 Ill. App. 3d 352, 355 , 307 N.E.2d 646 (1974); People v. Biocic , 80 Ill. … the constitutional distinctiveness of prior convictions, the Jones court noted, "[u]nlike virtually any other consideration used to enlarge the possible penalty for an offense, *** a prior conviction must itself have been established

Hynes v. Snyder

355 Ill. App. 3d 394 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 2, 2005

The problem with that conclusion is that there is no statute to support it; yet a statute is clearly a necessary part of a statute of limitations. … Thus, even assuming the Director had established an unreasonable delay, his laches argument would still fail.

People v. Einoder

209 Ill. 2d 443 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 1, 2004

“Statutes are presumed to be constitutional, and the party challenging the validity of the statute has the burden to clearly establish the constitutional invalidity.” Cryns, 203 Ill. 2d at 290 . … The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, alleging that section 21 — 6 was unconstitutionally vague because it does not adequately define who qualifies as a “chief security officer.”

American Automotive, Accessories, Inc. v. Fishman

979 F. Supp. 706 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 29, 1997

DISCUSSION The heart of the declarations fails to qualify for admissibility under Fed.R.Evid. 804(b)(3) governing the hearsay exception entitled “Statement against Interest.” … Plaintiffs have not met their burden of showing corroborating circumstances clearly indicating the trustworthiness of Fa-via’s statements.

Carter v. Cairo, Vincennes & Chicago Railway Co.

145 Ill. App. 653 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 24, 1908

Carter and John O’Connell were not qualified to testify to the probable cost of restoring the mine to its former condition, or to the fair cash market value of appellees’ leasehold right in the mine. … The amount of damages awarded to appellees by the jury is clearly within the range of the competent evidence in the record upon that issue.

People v. Montano

2017 IL App (2d) 140326 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 30, 2017

On that date, the Kane County State’s Attorney’s office offered and Roberto accepted immunity from prosecution based on anything he told them. … DaimlerChrysler Corp., 685 N.W.2d 391 (Mich. 2004),] if the proponent of the evidence establishes the foundation that (1) the handler was qualified to use the dog, (2) the dog was trained and accurate in identifying

Lee v. State of Illinois, Illinois Attorney General

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

Zatecky, 951 F.3d 873, 877 (7th Cir. 2020) (“Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense, but once it is raised the burden shifts to the plaintiff to defeat it. … To overcome qualified immunity, the facts viewed in the light most favorable to [the plaintiff] must show that the defendant[s] violated a constitutional right and that the right was clearly established at [that] time.”

Johns v. Village of Sauk Village

98 F. Supp. 2d 968 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 17, 2000

Brach & Sons, Inc., 105 F.3d 343, 349 (7th Cir.1997) (statistical evidence, alone, seldom establishes a case for disparate treatment). … Johns does not present the percentage of actual or potentially qualified African-American applicants in the Village. Had Mr.

Brown v. Village of Lisle

2023 IL App (2d) 210732-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 16, 2023

The department’s director, superintendent, or foreman then determined if a weather forecast qualified for a weather event response from the village. … To require defendant to remove freezing rain within 30 minutes where it had no actual or constructive notice, and limited resources, would be clearly unreasonable.

People v. Coates

109 Ill. 2d 431 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 18, 1985

Clearly, Nanette’s credibility was a central issue in the case, and information regarding her previous false accusations — as well as other DCFS information which might establish a motive for such accusations — was relevant … An erroneous procedure was employed by the trial court, and the majority has endorsed a method by which protective orders are immune to the rigors of appellate review.

People v. Anderson

234 Ill. App. 3d 899 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 31, 1992

This comment clearly addressed the central premise of our legal system, that one is innocent until proven guilty. … The evidence clearly and convincingly shows that defendant killed decedent.

People v. Tara

367 Ill. App. 3d 479 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 1, 2006

Beall makes several arguments why Blecker’s puncture wound should not qualify as a “serious physical injury.” … Thus, whether an injury qualifies as a “serious physical injury” depends on its severity.

Mancini Law Group, P.C. v. Schaumburg Police Department

454 Ill. Dec. 762 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 16, 2021

As established, however, the Department did not redact names appearing on the traffic accident reports. … Also, the court held section 7(1)(c) exempted dates of birth and policy account numbers as qualifying as “personal information.” See id. § 7(1)(c).

Slepicka v. State

2015 IL App (4th) 121103-B · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 16, 2015

May 30, 2007) (a provider participating in Medicaid must “[a]ccept as payment in full the amounts established by the Department”). ¶ 74 As the contract clearly said, however, it made no guarantee that … Nor do we find it to be “clearly evident” that defendant breached the duty of good faith and fair dealing by refraining from assigning plaintiff to a Medicaid-certified bed sooner than March 5, 2012. Id.

American Airlines, Inc. v. Department of Revenue

402 Ill. App. 3d 579 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 18, 2009

App. 3d at 736 , 745 N.E.2d at 653 (“[T]he decision is against the manifest weight of the evidence only if the opposite conclusion is clearly evident”). … agreement similar to that provided in section 6 of the ROTA (35 ILCS 120/6 (West 2006)). 9 The fourteenth amendment states in pertinent part: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities

People v. Jones

214 Ill. 2d 187 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 3, 2005

In sum, by 1986, the Vehicle Code clearly did not provide a right to refuse chemical testing. … This interpretation of section 11 — 501.2(c)(2) is consistent with well-established principles of statutory interpretation.