Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
23 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2026 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Illinois courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Ryan B.green2 sentences2025In re Ryan B., 212 Ill. 2d 226, 232 (2004); People v. Ward, 2015 Ill. 2d 317 , 325 (2005). 2025In re Ryan B., 212 Ill. 2d 226, 232 (2004); People v. Ward, 215 Ill. 2d 317, 325 (2005). | 2 | 2 |
Allord v. Municipal Officers Electoral Boardgreen2 sentences2011To properly obtain review of his cause, then, and in accordance with the well-established rules of strict compliance with the Code, petitioner must have strictly followed the service requirement of section 10-10.1, which prescribes who must be served, how they must be served and when they must be served with his petition for judicial review. ¶ 24 First, with respect to who must be served, section 10-10.1 requires a petitioner to serve a copy of his petition upon those who are indispensable parties to his cause, namely, "upon the [Board] and other parties to the proceeding[s]." 10 ILCS 5/10-10. 2011To properly obtain review of his cause, then, and in accordance with the well-established rules of strict compliance with the Code, petitioner must have strictly followed the service requirement of section 10-10.1, which prescribes who must be served, how they must be served and when they must be served with his petition for judicial review. ¶ 24 First, with respect to who must be served, section 10-10.1 requires a petitioner to serve a copy of his petition upon those who are indispensable parties to his cause, namely, “upon the [Board] and other parties to the proceeding[s].” 10 ILCS 5/10-10. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Schaefergreen2 sentences2006Indeed, Justice Miller, writing separately in Schaefer, emphasized this service requirement and specifically agreed with it: “I agree with the majority that the time period provided by the statute begins to run when the driver submits and properly serves a written request for a hearing, in accordance with our rules regarding service.” Schaefer, 154 Ill. 2d at 271 (Miller, C.J., specially concurring). 2006Indeed, Justice Miller, writing separately in Schaefer , emphasized this service requirement *997 and specifically agreed with it: "I agree with the majority that the time period provided by the statute begins to run when the driver submits and properly serves a written request for a hearing, in accordance with our rules regarding service." Schaefer, 154 Ill.2d at 271 , 182 Ill. | 1 | 2 |
Christine Kelley v. National Labor Relations Boardgreen1 sentence2026However, in discussing section 10(b) of the National Labor Relations Act ( 29 U.S.C. § 160 (b) (2024)), federal courts have observed two primary purposes of the service requirement: (1) to provide notice to the charged party that a charge of an unfair labor practice has been filed with the National Labor Relations Board (Kelley v. National Labor Relations Board, 79 F.3d 1238, 1246 (1st Cir. 1996)) and (2) to obtain an early statement of the position of the charged party in order to encourage early resolution of a charge before the formal complaint process begins. | 1 | 1 |
Hospital & Service Employees Union, Local 399, Service Employees International Union, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Boardgreen2 sentences2026Id.; Hospital & Service Employees Union, Local 399 v. National Labor Relations Board, 798 F.2d 1245, 1249 (9th Cir. 1986). ¶ 29 It follows that these are the two primary purposes of the service requirement in section 11(a) of the Act. 2026Id.; Hospital & Service Employees Union, Local 399 v. National Labor Relations Board, 798 F.2d 1245, 1249 (9th Cir. 1986). ¶ 29 It follows that these are the two primary purposes of the service requirement in section 11(a) of the Act. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Wardgreen1 sentence2025In re Ryan B., 212 Ill. 2d 226, 232 (2004); People v. Ward, 215 Ill. 2d 317, 325 (2005). | 1 | 1 |
Novakovic v. Samutingreen1 sentence2020We note that Adams fails to cite any authority to support his position. “[A] party who fails to argue or cite authority in support of a point waives the issue for purposes of appeal.” Novakovic v. Samutin, 354 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Herndon ex rel. Herndon v. Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Board of Educationgreen1 sentence2015Id. at 181. ¶ 25 In Immediato v. Rye Neck School District, 73 F.3d 454 (2d Cir. 1996), similar results were reached by the Second Circuit when the plaintiff challenged the constitutionality of the defendant's requirement students perform 40 hours of community service during four years of high school in order to graduate. | 1 | 1 |
Nelson v. Qualkinbushred2 sentences2012App. 3d 79, 87 , 907 N.E.2d 400, 407 (2009). 2012As recognized in Rivera v. City of Chicago Electoral Board, 2011 IL App (1st) 110283 , 956 N.E.2d 20 , “in accordance with the well-established rules of strict compliance with the Code, petitioner must have strictly followed the service requirement of section 10- 10.1, which prescribes who must be served, how they must be served and when they must be served with his petition for judicial review. *** Clearly, from the statutory language, this includes the Board itself, as the entity that issued the decision which the petitioner seeks to challenge.” Rivera, 2011 IL App (1st) 110283, ¶¶ 23-24 , 9 | 1 | 1 |
Arthur Murray Dance Studios of Cleveland, Inc. v. Wittergreen1 sentence2010“In this type of case, heavy procedural burdens impede the plaintiff employer.” Arthur Murray Dance Studios of Cleveland, Inc. v. Witter, 105 N.E.2d 685, 693 (Ohio Ct. Com. | 1 | 1 |
Keener v. CITY OF HERRINgreen1 sentence2010Keener v. City of Herrin, 235 Ill. 2d 338, 349 (2009). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Smithgreen1 sentence2006Three years later, in People v. Smith, this court reiterated the point by holding that the “hearing on a petition to rescind must be held within 30 days of the date of filing the petition in the circuit court with venue, with service on the State.” People v. Smith, 172 Ill. 2d 289, 295 (1996). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Robinson
green
2 sentences2016Thus, a violation of the service requirement was “not so likely to prejudice the right to appeal as to require an exception to the general rule that procedural commands to government officials are directory.” Id. ¶ 37 Similarly, in Geiler, 2016 IL 119095 , ¶ 24, the supreme court held that Illinois Supreme Court Rule 552 (eff. 2016Thus, a violation of the service requirement was “not so likely to prejudice the right to appeal as to require an exception to the general rule that procedural commands to government officials are directory.” Id. ¶ 37 Similarly, in Geiler, 2016 IL 119095 , ¶ 24, the supreme court held that Illinois Supreme Court Rule 552 (eff. | 2 | 2016–2016 |
People v. Geiler
green
2 sentences2016Thus, a violation of the service requirement was “not so likely to prejudice the right to appeal as to require an exception to the general rule that procedural commands to government officials are directory.” Id. ¶ 37 Similarly, in Geiler, 2016 IL 119095 , ¶ 24, the supreme court held that Illinois Supreme Court Rule 552 (eff. 2016Thus, a violation of the service requirement was “not so likely to prejudice the right to appeal as to require an exception to the general rule that procedural commands to government officials are directory.” Id. ¶ 37 Similarly, in Geiler, 2016 IL 119095 , ¶ 24, the supreme court held that Illinois Supreme Court Rule 552 (eff. | 2 | 2016–2016 |
Lockett v. Chicago Police Board
green
2 sentences1997The service requirement under the Review Law is "intended to 'hasten the procedure’ of administrative review and avoid undue delay.” Lockett, 133 Ill. 2d at 355 . 1997The service requirement under the Review Law is "intended to 'hasten the procedure' of administrative review and avoid undue delay." Lockett , 133 Ill. 2d at 355 . | 2 | 1997–1997 |
Palos Bank and Trust Company v. Illinois Property Tax Appeal Board
green
1 sentence2024Palos Bank & Trust Co. v. Illinois Property Tax Appeal Board, 2015 IL App (1st) 143324, ¶ 26 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
McGaughy v. Illinois Human Rights Commission
green
1 sentence2023The court explained that “meeting the service requirement under Rule 335(b) did not relieve [the petitioners] of the obligation to name all necessary party respondents in their petitions for review.” Id. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Quinn v. Board of Election Commissioners for the City of Chicago Electoral Board
green
1 sentence2022Specifically, she violated the statute by (1) not serving the objector at all (as opposed to his attorney); (2) serving by regular mail rather than by registered or certified mail; and (3) not serving by registered or certified mail within 5 days after service of the electoral board’s decision, here April 26. ¶ 19 Given these undisputed facts, the question before us becomes whether the circuit court correctly dismissed her petition because of her failure to comply with a mandatory statute. ¶ 20 This court addressed the same issue in Quinn v. Board of Election Commissioners for City of Chicago | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Immediato v. Rye Neck School District
green
1 sentence2015Id. at 181. ¶ 25 In Immediato v. Rye Neck School District, 73 F.3d 454 (2d Cir. 1996), similar results were reached by the Second Circuit when the plaintiff challenged the constitutionality of the defendant's requirement students perform 40 hours of community service during four years of high school in order to graduate. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Rivera v. CITY OF CHICAGO ELECTORAL BD.
green
2 sentences2012As recognized in Rivera v. City of Chicago Electoral Board, 2011 IL App (1st) 110283 , 956 N.E.2d 20 , “in accordance with the well-established rules of strict compliance with the Code, petitioner must have strictly followed the service requirement of section 10- 10.1, which prescribes who must be served, how they must be served and when they must be served with his petition for judicial review. *** Clearly, from the statutory language, this includes the Board itself, as the entity that issued the decision which the petitioner seeks to challenge.” Rivera, 2011 IL App (1st) 110283, ¶¶ 23-24 , 9 2012As recognized in Rivera v. City of Chicago Electoral Board, 2011 IL App (1st) 110283 , 956 N.E.2d 20 , “in accordance with the well-established rules of strict compliance with the Code, petitioner must have strictly followed the service requirement of section 10- 10.1, which prescribes who must be served, how they must be served and when they must be served with his petition for judicial review. *** Clearly, from the statutory language, this includes the Board itself, as the entity that issued the decision which the petitioner seeks to challenge.” Rivera, 2011 IL App (1st) 110283, ¶¶ 23-24 , 9 | 1 | 2012–2012 |
In Re Marriage of Betts
green
1 sentence1993(Betts I, 155 Ill. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Dahlke v. Hawthorne, Lane & Co.
green
2 sentences1991September 18, 1990, as corrected October 17, 1990), No. 1-89-0842, slip op. at 10 (although representation to court in tax deed proceeding may not have amounted to fraud, the failure to apprise the court of a subsequent mortgagee's interest was inexcusable under these facts, and the failure to comply with the service requirement could be collaterally attacked).) Fraud in this context is a "wrongful intent—an act calculated to deceive." Dahlke, 36 Ill.2d at 245 , 222 N.E.2d 465 . 1991September 18, 1990, as corrected October 17, 1990), No. 1-89-0842, slip op. at 10 (although representation to court in tax deed proceeding may not have amounted to fraud, the failure to apprise the court of a subsequent mortgagee's interest was inexcusable under these facts, and the failure to comply with the service requirement could be collaterally attacked).) Fraud in this context is a "wrongful intent—an act calculated to deceive." Dahlke, 36 Ill.2d at 245 , 222 N.E.2d 465 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
In Re DS
green
1 sentence1988App. 3d 76 , 522 N.E.2d 625 , appeal denied (1988), 121 Ill. 2d 570 , the court concluded that, based upon the supreme court’s decision in Pronger, the amendment adopted in Public Act 85 — 720 effectively reinstates the service requirement with respect to minor respondents who are eight years of age and older. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Bessler v. Board of Education of Chartered School District No. 150
neutral
1 sentence1979The legislature amended section 34 — 85 of the School Code pertaining to schools in cities with population over 500,000 on four occasions all after the decisions in Paprocki and in Bessler v. Board of Education (1973), 11 Ill. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.