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.
16 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2021 1 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. Pricegreen2 sentences2014See People v. Price, 364 Ill. 2014See People v. Price, 364 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Dixongreen2 sentences2005See People v. Smith, 338 Ill. App. 3d 555 (2003); People v. Dunn, 326 Ill. App. 3d 281 (2001); People v. Jones, 322 Ill. App. 3d 236 (2001); People v. Dixon, 319 Ill. App. 3d 881 (2001); People v. Givens, 319 Ill. App. 3d 910 (2001). 2005See People v. Smith , 338 Ill. App. 3d 555 (2003); People v. Dunn , 326 Ill. App. 3d 281 (2001); People v. Jones , 322 Ill. App. 3d 236 (2001); People v. Dixon , 319 Ill. App. 3d 881 (2001); People v. Givens , 319 Ill. App. 3d 910 (2001). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Givensgreen2 sentences2005See People v. Smith, 338 Ill. App. 3d 555 (2003); People v. Dunn, 326 Ill. App. 3d 281 (2001); People v. Jones, 322 Ill. App. 3d 236 (2001); People v. Dixon, 319 Ill. App. 3d 881 (2001); People v. Givens, 319 Ill. App. 3d 910 (2001). 2005See People v. Smith , 338 Ill. App. 3d 555 (2003); People v. Dunn , 326 Ill. App. 3d 281 (2001); People v. Jones , 322 Ill. App. 3d 236 (2001); People v. Dixon , 319 Ill. App. 3d 881 (2001); People v. Givens , 319 Ill. App. 3d 910 (2001). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Dunngreen2 sentences2005See People v. Smith, 338 Ill. App. 3d 555 (2003); People v. Dunn, 326 Ill. App. 3d 281 (2001); People v. Jones, 322 Ill. App. 3d 236 (2001); People v. Dixon, 319 Ill. App. 3d 881 (2001); People v. Givens, 319 Ill. App. 3d 910 (2001). 2005See People v. Smith , 338 Ill. App. 3d 555 (2003); People v. Dunn , 326 Ill. App. 3d 281 (2001); People v. Jones , 322 Ill. App. 3d 236 (2001); People v. Dixon , 319 Ill. App. 3d 881 (2001); People v. Givens , 319 Ill. App. 3d 910 (2001). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Smithgreen2 sentences2005See People v. Smith, 338 Ill. App. 3d 555 (2003); People v. Dunn, 326 Ill. App. 3d 281 (2001); People v. Jones, 322 Ill. App. 3d 236 (2001); People v. Dixon, 319 Ill. App. 3d 881 (2001); People v. Givens, 319 Ill. App. 3d 910 (2001). 2005See People v. Smith , 338 Ill. App. 3d 555 (2003); People v. Dunn , 326 Ill. App. 3d 281 (2001); People v. Jones , 322 Ill. App. 3d 236 (2001); People v. Dixon , 319 Ill. App. 3d 881 (2001); People v. Givens , 319 Ill. App. 3d 910 (2001). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Jonesgreen2 sentences2005See People v. Smith, 338 Ill. App. 3d 555 (2003); People v. Dunn, 326 Ill. App. 3d 281 (2001); People v. Jones, 322 Ill. App. 3d 236 (2001); People v. Dixon, 319 Ill. App. 3d 881 (2001); People v. Givens, 319 Ill. App. 3d 910 (2001). 2005See People v. Smith , 338 Ill. App. 3d 555 (2003); People v. Dunn , 326 Ill. App. 3d 281 (2001); People v. Jones , 322 Ill. App. 3d 236 (2001); People v. Dixon , 319 Ill. App. 3d 881 (2001); People v. Givens , 319 Ill. App. 3d 910 (2001). | 2 | 2 |
City of Chicago v. Romangreen2 sentences2001Assuming, however, that Mitchell created some confusion as to the continued validity of the requirement that a court have inherent power to make or enter the particular order involved, such confusion was dispelled in City of Chicago v. Roman, 184 Ill.2d 504, 510 , 235 Ill.Dec. 468 , 705 N.E.2d 81 (1998), a decision issued 10 months after Mitchell, and one which the majority fails to acknowledge. 2001Assuming, however, that Mitchell created some confusion as to the continued validity of the requirement that a court have inherent power to make or enter the particular order involved, such confusion was dispelled in City of Chicago v. Roman, 184 Ill. 2d 504, 510 (1998), a decision issued 10 months after Mitchell, and one which the majority fails to acknowledge. | 2 | 2 |
Schnepf v. Schnepfgreen1 sentence2021Compare Schnepf, 2013 IL App (4th) 121142, ¶ 27 (finding that, where the movant has satisfied the statutory prerequisites for a substitution of judge, the motion must be granted), with Partipilo v. Partipilo, 331 Ill. App. 3d 394, 398 (2002) (“Even when the court has not ruled on a substantial issue, a motion for substitution of judge should be denied if the moving party had an opportunity to test the waters and form an opinion as to the court’s reaction to his or her claim.”); see Colagrossi, 2016 IL App (1st) 142216, ¶ 36 (noting the split of authority). | 1 | 1 |
Partipilo v. Partipilogreen1 sentence2021Compare Schnepf, 2013 IL App (4th) 121142, ¶ 27 (finding that, where the movant has satisfied the statutory prerequisites for a substitution of judge, the motion must be granted), with Partipilo v. Partipilo, 331 Ill. App. 3d 394, 398 (2002) (“Even when the court has not ruled on a substantial issue, a motion for substitution of judge should be denied if the moving party had an opportunity to test the waters and form an opinion as to the court’s reaction to his or her claim.”); see Colagrossi, 2016 IL App (1st) 142216, ¶ 36 (noting the split of authority). | 1 | 1 |
Colagrossi v. The Royal Bank of Scotlandgreen1 sentence2021Compare Schnepf, 2013 IL App (4th) 121142, ¶ 27 (finding that, where the movant has satisfied the statutory prerequisites for a substitution of judge, the motion must be granted), with Partipilo v. Partipilo, 331 Ill. App. 3d 394, 398 (2002) (“Even when the court has not ruled on a substantial issue, a motion for substitution of judge should be denied if the moving party had an opportunity to test the waters and form an opinion as to the court’s reaction to his or her claim.”); see Colagrossi, 2016 IL App (1st) 142216, ¶ 36 (noting the split of authority). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mt. Zion State Bank & Trust v. Consolidated Communications, Inc.
green
2 sentences1995Ward v. K Mart Corp. (1990), 136 Ill.2d 132 , 143 Ill.Dec. 288 , 554 N.E.2d 223 ; but see Mount Zion State Bank & Trust v. Consolidated Communications, Inc. (1994), 267 Ill.App.3d 402 , 204 Ill.Dec. 609 , 641 N.E.2d 1228 (questioned the continued validity of the doctrine of open and obvious). 1995Ward v. K Mart Corp. (1990), 136 Ill.2d 132 , 143 Ill.Dec. 288 , 554 N.E.2d 223 ; but see Mount Zion State Bank & Trust v. Consolidated Communications, Inc. (1994), 267 Ill.App.3d 402 , 204 Ill.Dec. 609 , 641 N.E.2d 1228 (questioned the continued validity of the doctrine of open and obvious). | 3 | 1994–1995 |
Hajian v. Holy Family Hospital
green
2 sentences2011App.3d 19, 23 , 91 Ill.Dec. 806 , 484 N.E.2d 365 (1985), aff'd on other grounds, 115 Ill.2d 471 , 106 Ill.Dec. 25 , 505 N.E.2d 331 (1987); Alvarado v. Goepp, 278 Ill.App.3d 494, 496-97 , 215 Ill.Dec. 313 , 663 N.E.2d 63 (1996); Hajian v. Holy Family Hospital, 273 Ill.App.3d 932, 942-43 , 210 Ill.Dec. 156 , 652 N.E.2d 1132 (1995). ¶ 47 We need not determine the continued validity of the rule of necessity described above because the testimony regarding Eskew's careful habits was admitted without objection. 2011App. 3d 932, 942-43 , 652 N.E.2d 1132 (1995). ¶ 47 We need not determine the continued validity of the rule of necessity described above because the testimony regarding Eskew’s careful habits was admitted without objection. | 2 | 2011–2011 |
People v. Eghan
green
2 sentences2006Moreover, in People v. Eghan, 344 Ill. App. 3d 301, 308 , 799 N.E.2d 1026 (2003), the court questioned the continued validity of the analysis in Benjamin Jones, in light of the supreme court’s holding in Adams that a defendant need not control the premises in order to have constructive possession of the drugs. 2006Moreover, in People v. Eghan, 344 Ill. App. 3d 301, 308 , 799 N.E.2d 1026 (2003), the court questioned the continued validity of the analysis in Benjamin Jones, in light of the supreme court’s holding in Adams that a defendant need not control the premises in order to have constructive possession of the drugs. | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Franz v. Edgar
green
2 sentences2005Sutton observed that the administrative rule had been previously invalidated in Franz v. Edgar , 133 Ill. 2005Sutton observed that the administrative rule had been previously invalidated in Franz v. Edgar, 133 Ill. | 2 | 2005–2005 |
Ward v. K Mart Corp.
green
2 sentences1995Ward v. K Mart Corp. (1990), 136 Ill.2d 132 , 143 Ill.Dec. 288 , 554 N.E.2d 223 ; but see Mount Zion State Bank & Trust v. Consolidated Communications, Inc. (1994), 267 Ill.App.3d 402 , 204 Ill.Dec. 609 , 641 N.E.2d 1228 (questioned the continued validity of the doctrine of open and obvious). 1995Ward v. K Mart Corp. (1990), 136 Ill.2d 132 , 143 Ill.Dec. 288 , 554 N.E.2d 223 ; but see Mount Zion State Bank & Trust v. Consolidated Communications, Inc. (1994), 267 Ill.App.3d 402 , 204 Ill.Dec. 609 , 641 N.E.2d 1228 (questioned the continued validity of the doctrine of open and obvious). | 2 | 1995–1995 |
Bradfield v. Illinois Central Gulf Railroad
green
2 sentences2011App.3d 19, 23 , 91 Ill.Dec. 806 , 484 N.E.2d 365 (1985), aff'd on other grounds, 115 Ill.2d 471 , 106 Ill.Dec. 25 , 505 N.E.2d 331 (1987); Alvarado v. Goepp, 278 Ill.App.3d 494, 496-97 , 215 Ill.Dec. 313 , 663 N.E.2d 63 (1996); Hajian v. Holy Family Hospital, 273 Ill.App.3d 932, 942-43 , 210 Ill.Dec. 156 , 652 N.E.2d 1132 (1995). ¶ 47 We need not determine the continued validity of the rule of necessity described above because the testimony regarding Eskew's careful habits was admitted without objection. 2011App.3d 19, 23 , 91 Ill.Dec. 806 , 484 N.E.2d 365 (1985), aff'd on other grounds, 115 Ill.2d 471 , 106 Ill.Dec. 25 , 505 N.E.2d 331 (1987); Alvarado v. Goepp, 278 Ill.App.3d 494, 496-97 , 215 Ill.Dec. 313 , 663 N.E.2d 63 (1996); Hajian v. Holy Family Hospital, 273 Ill.App.3d 932, 942-43 , 210 Ill.Dec. 156 , 652 N.E.2d 1132 (1995). ¶ 47 We need not determine the continued validity of the rule of necessity described above because the testimony regarding Eskew's careful habits was admitted without objection. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Alvarado v. Goepp
green
2 sentences2011App.3d 19, 23 , 91 Ill.Dec. 806 , 484 N.E.2d 365 (1985), aff'd on other grounds, 115 Ill.2d 471 , 106 Ill.Dec. 25 , 505 N.E.2d 331 (1987); Alvarado v. Goepp, 278 Ill.App.3d 494, 496-97 , 215 Ill.Dec. 313 , 663 N.E.2d 63 (1996); Hajian v. Holy Family Hospital, 273 Ill.App.3d 932, 942-43 , 210 Ill.Dec. 156 , 652 N.E.2d 1132 (1995). ¶ 47 We need not determine the continued validity of the rule of necessity described above because the testimony regarding Eskew's careful habits was admitted without objection. 2011App.3d 19, 23 , 91 Ill.Dec. 806 , 484 N.E.2d 365 (1985), aff'd on other grounds, 115 Ill.2d 471 , 106 Ill.Dec. 25 , 505 N.E.2d 331 (1987); Alvarado v. Goepp, 278 Ill.App.3d 494, 496-97 , 215 Ill.Dec. 313 , 663 N.E.2d 63 (1996); Hajian v. Holy Family Hospital, 273 Ill.App.3d 932, 942-43 , 210 Ill.Dec. 156 , 652 N.E.2d 1132 (1995). ¶ 47 We need not determine the continued validity of the rule of necessity described above because the testimony regarding Eskew's careful habits was admitted without objection. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Bradfield v. Illinois Central Gulf Railroad
green
2 sentences2011App.3d 19, 23 , 91 Ill.Dec. 806 , 484 N.E.2d 365 (1985), aff'd on other grounds, 115 Ill.2d 471 , 106 Ill.Dec. 25 , 505 N.E.2d 331 (1987); Alvarado v. Goepp, 278 Ill.App.3d 494, 496-97 , 215 Ill.Dec. 313 , 663 N.E.2d 63 (1996); Hajian v. Holy Family Hospital, 273 Ill.App.3d 932, 942-43 , 210 Ill.Dec. 156 , 652 N.E.2d 1132 (1995). ¶ 47 We need not determine the continued validity of the rule of necessity described above because the testimony regarding Eskew's careful habits was admitted without objection. 2011App.3d 19, 23 , 91 Ill.Dec. 806 , 484 N.E.2d 365 (1985), aff'd on other grounds, 115 Ill.2d 471 , 106 Ill.Dec. 25 , 505 N.E.2d 331 (1987); Alvarado v. Goepp, 278 Ill.App.3d 494, 496-97 , 215 Ill.Dec. 313 , 663 N.E.2d 63 (1996); Hajian v. Holy Family Hospital, 273 Ill.App.3d 932, 942-43 , 210 Ill.Dec. 156 , 652 N.E.2d 1132 (1995). ¶ 47 We need not determine the continued validity of the rule of necessity described above because the testimony regarding Eskew's careful habits was admitted without objection. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
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.