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.
19 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1987–2025 8 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. Burtgreen2 sentences2025See People v. Burt, 205 Ill. 2d 28, 47 (2001) (the Illinois Supreme Court rejected the defendant’s Brady claim because the defendant did not satisfy the first element of the test since the suppressed evidence was not exculpatory). 2024See People v. Burt, 205 Ill. 2d 28, 47 (2001) (the Illinois Supreme Court rejected the defendant’s Brady claim because the defendant did not satisfy the first element of the test since the suppressed evidence was not exculpatory). | 2 | 2 |
Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., Ltd.green2 sentences2015Plaintiffs suffered damages as a direct and proximate result of the fraudulent concealment alleged. ¶ 59 In Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., 174 Ill. 2d 482, 500 (1996), the supreme court stated that, under the first element of a claim for fraudulent concealment, a duty to speak arises if the plaintiff and the defendant are in a fiduciary or confidential relationship. 2015Plaintiffs suffered damages as a direct and proximate result of the fraudulent concealment alleged. ¶ 59 In Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., 174 Ill. 2d 482, 500 (1996), the supreme court stated that, under the first element of a claim for fraudulent concealment, a duty to speak arises if the plaintiff and the defendant are in a fiduciary or confidential relationship. | 2 | 2 |
Strickland v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2022See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984) (explaining that the first element of a claim of ineffective assistance is that “counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the ‘counsel’ guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment [(U.S. Const., amend. 1991Ed. 2d 674, 699 , 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2069-70 .” (Albanese, 104 Ill. 2d at 527 .) “As to the first element of the standard, there is a strong presumption that the challenged action of counsel was the product of sound trial strategy and not of incompetence.” People v. Barrow (1989), 133 Ill. 2d 226, 247 . | 1 | 5 |
Feltmeier v. Feltmeiergreen1 sentence2023See Feltmeier, 207 Ill. 2d at 268 (all three elements are necessary); Schiller, 357 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
In re Julie M.green1 sentence2022In re Julie M., 2021 IL 125768, ¶ 22 (citing In re Benny M., 2017 IL 120133 , ¶¶ 19- 20). ¶ 21 In this case, the first element of the exception for issues capable of repetition yet evading review has been met because the 90-day duration of the involuntary treatment order was too brief to allow appellate review. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Alfred HHgreen1 sentence2022See In re Alfred H.H., 233 Ill. 2d 345, 358 (2009). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Pecogreen1 sentence2022VI)]”); People v. Edwards, 195 Ill. 2d 142, 163-64 (2001); People v. Peco, 345 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Edwardsgreen1 sentence2022VI)]”); People v. Edwards, 195 Ill. 2d 142, 163-64 (2001); People v. Peco, 345 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. Haydengreen2 sentences1992See Warden v. Hayden (1967), 387 U.S. 294, 298-99 , 18 L. 1992See Warden v. Hayden (1967), 387 U.S. 294, 298-99 , 18 L. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
WINGO BY WINGO v. Rockford Memorial Hosp.
green
1 sentence2025The various acts regulating the health professions [citations] provide for different training, and regulate the treatment each profession may offer. *** In its wisdom, the legislature has recognized a fundamental tenet of contemporary life: no one person, group or school has yet succeeded in abstracting a universal medical method from the many changing methods used in science and medicine.” ¶ 40 However, in Wingo, 292 Ill. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Green v. Rogers
green
1 sentence2025Green, 234 Ill. 2d at 491 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Schiller v. Mitchell
green
1 sentence2023See Feltmeier, 207 Ill. 2d at 268 (all three elements are necessary); Schiller, 357 Ill. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Benny M. (In Re Benny M.)
green
1 sentence2022In re Julie M., 2021 IL 125768, ¶ 22 (citing In re Benny M., 2017 IL 120133 , ¶¶ 19- 20). ¶ 21 In this case, the first element of the exception for issues capable of repetition yet evading review has been met because the 90-day duration of the involuntary treatment order was too brief to allow appellate review. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Pack v. Maslikiewicz
green
1 sentence2022Justifiable Reliance ¶ 90 “As part of its fraud claim, a plaintiff must show that its reliance on the misrepresentation was justified.” Pack v. Maslikiewicz, 2019 IL App (1st) 182447, ¶ 105 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Schillerstrom Homes, Inc. v. City of Naperville
green
1 sentence2013Id. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Zamouski v. Gerrard
green
1 sentence1993App. 3d 890 , 275 N.E.2d 429 .) Because we have determined that plaintiff had no contractual right to evaluation or grievance procedures beyond those he received, and that he had no expectation of tenure at the time at vzhich he was discharged, the first element of his claim for tortious interference with contractual rights is absent. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
People v. Barrow
green
1 sentence1991Ed. 2d 674, 699 , 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2069-70 .” (Albanese, 104 Ill. 2d at 527 .) “As to the first element of the standard, there is a strong presumption that the challenged action of counsel was the product of sound trial strategy and not of incompetence.” People v. Barrow (1989), 133 Ill. 2d 226, 247 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
People v. Albanese
green
1 sentence1991Ed. 2d 674, 699 , 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2069-70 .” (Albanese, 104 Ill. 2d at 527 .) “As to the first element of the standard, there is a strong presumption that the challenged action of counsel was the product of sound trial strategy and not of incompetence.” People v. Barrow (1989), 133 Ill. 2d 226, 247 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
People v. Shum
green
2 sentences1990(People v. Shum (1987), 117 Ill. 2d 317, 369-70 , 512 N.E.2d 1183 .) Regarding the first element of this test, an alleged incompetency arising from a matter of tactics or strategy will not support a claim of ineffective representation. 1990(People v. Shum (1987), 117 Ill. 2d 317, 369-70 , 512 N.E.2d 1183 .) Regarding the first element of this test, an alleged incompetency arising from a matter of tactics or strategy will not support a claim of ineffective representation. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
People v. Haywood
green
2 sentences1987As to the first element of the test, this court has held that alleged incompetency arising from a matter of trial tactics or strategy will not support a claim of ineffective representation ( People v. Haywood (1980), 82 Ill.2d 540, 543-44 ), even in a death penalty case ( People v. Madej (1985), 106 Ill.2d 201, 214 ). 1987As to the first element of the test, this court has held that alleged incompetency arising from a matter of trial tactics or strategy will not support a claim of ineffective representation (People v. Haywood (1980), 82 Ill. 2d 540, 543-44 ), even in a death penalty case (People v. Madej (1985), 106 Ill. 2d 201, 214 ). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
People v. Madej
green
2 sentences1987As to the first element of the test, this court has held that alleged incompetency arising from a matter of trial tactics or strategy will not support a claim of ineffective representation ( People v. Haywood (1980), 82 Ill.2d 540, 543-44 ), even in a death penalty case ( People v. Madej (1985), 106 Ill.2d 201, 214 ). 1987As to the first element of the test, this court has held that alleged incompetency arising from a matter of trial tactics or strategy will not support a claim of ineffective representation (People v. Haywood (1980), 82 Ill. 2d 540, 543-44 ), even in a death penalty case (People v. Madej (1985), 106 Ill. 2d 201, 214 ). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
People v. Lewis
green
1 sentence1987Furthermore, we have held that the failure to offer evidence in mitigation does not, in and of itself, demonstrate incompetence. ( People v. Lewis (1984), 105 Ill.2d 226, 249 ; People v. Kubat (1983), 94 Ill.2d 437, 488 .) We find therefore that the defendant has failed to demonstrate representation which falls below an objective standard of reasonableness. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
People v. Kubat
green
1 sentence1987Furthermore, we have held that the failure to offer evidence in mitigation does not, in and of itself, demonstrate incompetence. ( People v. Lewis (1984), 105 Ill.2d 226, 249 ; People v. Kubat (1983), 94 Ill.2d 437, 488 .) We find therefore that the defendant has failed to demonstrate representation which falls below an objective standard of reasonableness. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
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.