Case law

People v. Macias

2025 IL App (1st) 230678 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 21, 2025

The parties stipulated that Macias had two qualifying prior felony convictions. ¶6 Macias called four witnesses in his defense. … Id. at 47-48 (threats to kill an inmate made years before he was found possessing a knife did not qualify as a specific and immediate threat); People v. Tackett, 169 Ill.

Faith Builders Church v. Department of Revenue

Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 7, 2008

It is beyond dispute that, under the case law, religious instruction qualifies as a religious purpose. Evangelical Teacher Training Ass'n, 118 Ill. … First, does the property "contain[] a school *** offer[ing] an established, commonly accepted program of academic instruction"?

Williams v. Haleighs Hope, Inc

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Mar 11, 2025

Plaintiff alleges each DCFS Defendant performed several negligent acts and/or omissions that clearly fall within the scope of being a DCFS “Child Welfare Employee.” … This Court is bound by the Seventh Circuit’s decision in T.S. and the Illinois Supreme Court’s decision in Healy, which establish that the DCPS Defendants are entitled to sovereign immunity. Il.

People v. Brisbon

129 Ill. 2d 200 · Illinois Supreme Court · May 24, 1989

The record clearly indicates that Martin testified that he observed the stabbing incident. The defendant was given ample opportunity to cross-examine Martin. … The Court articulated the appropriate standard for enabling a defendant to establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination in the context of voir dire: “To establish such a case, the defendant first must show that

Ochoa

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Feb 24, 2026

Thus, the district judge and prosecutors were entitled to absolute immunity. See Polzin v. … and will require Defendant to pay the total costs of formal service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d)(2). 12) The Court directs the Clerk to enter the standard qualified

Lee v. Calfa

174 Ill. App. 3d 101 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 24, 1988

In an action against an insurance agent for damages sustained as a result of the agent’s alleged failure to obtain proper insurance coverage, expert testimony was unnecessary to establish a standard of care. … The trial court has the discretion to determine which instruction shall be given, and the exercise of such discretion will not be disturbed on review unless it has been clearly abused. (Clarkson v.

Moultrie III v. Cheesman

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Sep 12, 2022

Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259, 269 (1993) (“In determining whether particular actions of government officials fit within a common-law tradition of absolute immunity, or only the more general standard of qualified immunity, … Qualified immunity, by contrast, covers administrative or investigative functions “that do not relate to an advocate’s preparation for the initiation of a prosecution or for judicial proceedings.”

Patent Scaffolding Co. v. Standard Oil Co.

68 Ill. App. 2d 29 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 1, 1966

Emerson-Comstock Co., 141 F Supp 143 (ND Ill) when the court said: “While there are early cases in some states expressing a public policy against indemnifying a tort feasor for his own negligence it is today well established … construed as indemnifying one against his own negligence unless such a construction is required by clear and explicit language of the contract, which we agree is the Illinois rule of strict construction, we find that rule is qualified

Newby v. LAKE ZURICH COMMUNITY UNIT

136 Ill. App. 3d 92 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 27, 1985

Illinois law, however, clearly holds to the contrary. In Morrow v. L. A. Goldschmidt Associates, Inc. (1984), 126 Ill. … The court wrote: “When a municipality adopts a plan or design for improvements of public property, the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act, after exculpating the governmental unit from liability

City of Aurora v. Brown

12 Ill. App. 122 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 9, 1883

precaution to hold to this rail as they passed down, no one had ever fallen or had ever experienced any trouble in passing down in perfect safety. “ A city is not required to have its sidewalks so constructed as to secure immunity … not determine that the appellant would not have been negligent under all the circumstances in not furnishing a better walk in case appellee had not been familiar with it, but we think under all the circumstances that he clearly

Central Stock & Grain Exchange v. Pine Tree Lumber Co.

140 Ill. App. 471 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 6, 1908

It considered itself immune from final process. … Section 10 is clearly a limitation upon the time given to corporations by the statute to settle up their affairs, and while it has been decided that a dissolved corporation may prosecute an appeal or sue out a writ of error

Village of Rosemont v. Jaffe (In Re Emerald Casino, Inc.)

334 B.R. 378 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 7, 2005

Moreover, Rosemont has not established that the bankruptcy court abused its discretion in declining to enjoin the Disciplinary Proceedings. … Therefore, the Court need not address the issue of whether the State of Illinois' sovereign immunity bars the Court from exercising jurisdiction over Rosemont's claims, or whether the in rem exception to sovereign immunity

Collgood, Inc. v. Sands Drug Co.

5 Ill. App. 3d 910 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 8, 1972

The same conclusion was reached by plaintiffs’ second expert witness, a qualified fire inspector, who testified from the facts presented in hypothetical form. … The record clearly shows that the subrogation receipts were admitted into "evidence by stipulation of both parties for the limited purpose of proving the insuror’s right of subrogation, and that the witness Pulley’s testimony

Commissioners of Saline Branch Drainage District v. Pilcher

19 Ill. App. 3d 125 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 25, 1974

It failed to clearly and unambiguously state the method by which the proposed work was to be accomplished. That portion of the order in question states: “4. … Stat. 1933, chapter 42, par. 39, in which the method for obtaining additional assessments is established.

In Re Estate of Wolfner

27 Ill. 2d 221 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 1, 1963

Section 75 of the act specifically provides that unless the will states otherwise, if one of several executors fails to qualify "letters testamentary shall be issued to the executor who qualifies and accepts the office" ( … Clearly, no reason to call Toni Zollner as a witness existed until such time as a proper foundation for impeachment had been laid, and, if Jane Dodson admitted a conversation with Toni Zollner as outlined in the offer of

Davis v. Cash for Payday, Inc.

193 F.R.D. 518 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 26, 2000

The defendants argue that Davis has not established that he will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. … The Smith court explained that merely because the check may qualify as “security,” it does not also qualify as a “security interest,” which could properly be disclosed on the loan agreement.

Foust v. The Forest Preserve District of Cook County

408 Ill. Dec. 218 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 2016

Defendant further argued that the character of the trail established it as a “riding trail” under section 3-107(b). Accordingly, defendant argued that the section 3-107(b) immunity applied. … establishes that if branch failure occurred, the target below would be the paved path and perhaps pedestrians who frequently use the subject trail.”

Kemnitz v. Semrad

206 Ill. App. 3d 668 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 29, 1990

The medical standard of care must be that of a reasonably well-qualified practitioner in the locality where the defendant doctor practices (Purtill v. … to establish a deviation.

Taisho Marine & Fire Insurance v. Maersk Line, Inc.

796 F. Supp. 336 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 8, 1992

Dixon, [1955] 1 Q.B. 158 (C.A.1954), a “Himalaya Clause” is a bill of lading provision that extends the protections and immunities of a carrier to its agents and subcontractors. … Rule 56 principles impose on the movant the burden of establishing the lack of a genuine issue of material fact (Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 , 106 S.Ct. 2548, 2552-53 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986)).

People v. Grant

104 Ill. App. 3d 183 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 7, 1982

The burden of establishing that he was not responsible for a delay and is entitled to discharge rests upon the defendant. (People v. Pearson (1980), 88 Ill. App. 3d 616 , 410 N.E.2d 958 .) … This two-day period was clearly a delay caused by or contributed to by the defendant.