16 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1905–2024 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. Gutierrezgreen2 sentences2018See, e.g., People v. Gutierrez, 324 P.3d 245, 268-69 (Cal. 2014) (“Miller discussed a range of factors relevant to a sentencer’s determination of whether a particular defendant” is irreparably corrupt); Riley, 110 A.3d at 1216 (quoting Miller’s list of characteristics); State v. Null, 836 N.W.2d 41, 74-76 (Iowa 2013) (listing factors and stating that Miller provided “clearer guidance on the considerations given in sentencing”); State v. Fletcher, 47,777, p. 10 (La. 2017See, e.g. , People v. Gutierrez , 58 Cal.4th 1354 , 171 Cal.Rptr.3d 421 , 324 P.3d 245 , 268-69 (2014) (" Miller discussed a range of factors relevant to a sentencer's determination of whether a particular defendant" is irreparably corrupt); Riley , 110 A.3d at 1216 (quoting Miller 's list of characteristics); State v. Null , 836 N.W.2d 41 , 74-76 (Iowa 2013) (listing factors and stating that Miller provided "clearer guidance on the considerations given in sentencing"); State v. Fletcher , 47,777, p. 10 (La. | 2 | 2 |
In Re Marriage of Koberleingreen2 sentences2003“While the touchstone of proper apportionment is whether the division is equitable in nature, a just division does not require mathematical equality, given the range of factors to be considered by the trial court.” Koberlein, 281 Ill. 2003"While the touchstone of proper apportionment is whether the division is equitable in nature, a just division does not require mathematical equality, given the range of factors to be considered by the trial court." Koberlein, 281 Ill.App.3d at 887 , 217 Ill.Dec. 606 , 667 N.E.2d at 700 (several factors supported the trial court's award of limited maintenance to ex-wife: ex-husband received custody of the parties' son, ex-wife received one-half of the marital property and will be receiving $91,000 over the next 10 years, the modest marital standard of living, and the ex-wife's relatively young | 2 | 2 |
People v. Hillenbrandgreen2 sentences1998People v. Guest , 166 Ill. 2d 381, 394 (1995); Flores , 128 Ill. 2d at 106 ; People v. Hillenbrand , 121 Ill. 2d 537, 548 (1988) (mistakes in trial strategy or in judgment alone do not render representation incompetent); People v. Madej , 106 Ill. 2d 201, 214 (1985). 1998People v. Guest, 166 Ill. 2d 381, 394 (1995); Flores, 128 Ill. 2d at 106 ; People v. Hillenbrand, 121 Ill. 2d 537, 548 (1988) (mistakes in trial strategy or in judgment alone do not render representation incompetent); People v. Madej, 106 Ill. 2d 201, 214 (1985). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Madejgreen2 sentences1998People v. Guest , 166 Ill. 2d 381, 394 (1995); Flores , 128 Ill. 2d at 106 ; People v. Hillenbrand , 121 Ill. 2d 537, 548 (1988) (mistakes in trial strategy or in judgment alone do not render representation incompetent); People v. Madej , 106 Ill. 2d 201, 214 (1985). 1998People v. Guest, 166 Ill. 2d 381, 394 (1995); Flores, 128 Ill. 2d at 106 ; People v. Hillenbrand, 121 Ill. 2d 537, 548 (1988) (mistakes in trial strategy or in judgment alone do not render representation incompetent); People v. Madej, 106 Ill. 2d 201, 214 (1985). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Guestgreen2 sentences1998People v. Guest , 166 Ill. 2d 381, 394 (1995); Flores , 128 Ill. 2d at 106 ; People v. Hillenbrand , 121 Ill. 2d 537, 548 (1988) (mistakes in trial strategy or in judgment alone do not render representation incompetent); People v. Madej , 106 Ill. 2d 201, 214 (1985). 1998People v. Guest, 166 Ill. 2d 381, 394 (1995); Flores, 128 Ill. 2d at 106 ; People v. Hillenbrand, 121 Ill. 2d 537, 548 (1988) (mistakes in trial strategy or in judgment alone do not render representation incompetent); People v. Madej, 106 Ill. 2d 201, 214 (1985). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Hartgreen2 sentences2018App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13); 112 So. 3d 1031 (remanding for “a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller”); State v. Hart, 404 S.W.3d 232, 238 (Mo. 2013) (en banc) (holding that the juvenile defendant’s life sentence was unconstitutional because “the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller”); State v. Ali, 855 N.W.2d 235, 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that “mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to,” the characteristics in Miller); Parker v. State, 2017App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13), 112 So.3d 1031 (remanding for "a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller "); State v. Hart , 404 S.W.3d 232 , 238 (Mo. 2013) ( en banc ) (holding that the juvenile defendant's life sentence was unconstitutional because "the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller "); State v. Ali , 855 N.W.2d 235 , 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that "mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to," the characteristics in Miller ); Parker v. | 1 | 2 |
State of Iowa v. Denem Anthony Nullgreen2 sentences2018See, e.g., People v. Gutierrez, 324 P.3d 245, 268-69 (Cal. 2014) (“Miller discussed a range of factors relevant to a sentencer’s determination of whether a particular defendant” is irreparably corrupt); Riley, 110 A.3d at 1216 (quoting Miller’s list of characteristics); State v. Null, 836 N.W.2d 41, 74-76 (Iowa 2013) (listing factors and stating that Miller provided “clearer guidance on the considerations given in sentencing”); State v. Fletcher, 47,777, p. 10 (La. 2017See, e.g. , People v. Gutierrez , 58 Cal.4th 1354 , 171 Cal.Rptr.3d 421 , 324 P.3d 245 , 268-69 (2014) (" Miller discussed a range of factors relevant to a sentencer's determination of whether a particular defendant" is irreparably corrupt); Riley , 110 A.3d at 1216 (quoting Miller 's list of characteristics); State v. Null , 836 N.W.2d 41 , 74-76 (Iowa 2013) (listing factors and stating that Miller provided "clearer guidance on the considerations given in sentencing"); State v. Fletcher , 47,777, p. 10 (La. | 1 | 2 |
LUNA v. STATEgreen2 sentences2018App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13); 112 So. 3d 1031 (remanding for “a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller”); State v. Hart, 404 S.W.3d 232, 238 (Mo. 2013) (en banc) (holding that the juvenile defendant’s life sentence was unconstitutional because “the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller”); State v. Ali, 855 N.W.2d 235, 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that “mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to,” the characteristics in Miller); Parker v. State, 2017App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13), 112 So.3d 1031 (remanding for "a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller "); State v. Hart , 404 S.W.3d 232 , 238 (Mo. 2013) ( en banc ) (holding that the juvenile defendant's life sentence was unconstitutional because "the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller "); State v. Ali , 855 N.W.2d 235 , 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that "mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to," the characteristics in Miller ); Parker v. | 1 | 2 |
State of Minnesota v. Mahdi Hassan Aligreen2 sentences2018App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13); 112 So. 3d 1031 (remanding for “a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller”); State v. Hart, 404 S.W.3d 232, 238 (Mo. 2013) (en banc) (holding that the juvenile defendant’s life sentence was unconstitutional because “the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller”); State v. Ali, 855 N.W.2d 235, 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that “mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to,” the characteristics in Miller); Parker v. State, 2017App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13), 112 So.3d 1031 (remanding for "a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller "); State v. Hart , 404 S.W.3d 232 , 238 (Mo. 2013) ( en banc ) (holding that the juvenile defendant's life sentence was unconstitutional because "the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller "); State v. Ali , 855 N.W.2d 235 , 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that "mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to," the characteristics in Miller ); Parker v. | 1 | 2 |
Bryan Range v. Attorney General United Statesgreen1 sentence2024Range, 69 F.4th at 98. | 1 | 1 |
Travelers Insurance v. Eljer Manufacturing, Inc.green1 sentence2024Setting aside the fact that decisions of lower federal courts do not bind this court (see Travelers Insurance Co. v. Eljer Manufacturing, Inc., 197 Ill. 2d 278, 302 (2001)), the Range defendant was convicted of a misdemeanor. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Knoxgreen1 sentence2018App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13); 112 So. 3d 1031 (remanding for “a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller”); State v. Hart, 404 S.W.3d 232, 238 (Mo. 2013) (en banc) (holding that the juvenile defendant’s life sentence was unconstitutional because “the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller”); State v. Ali, 855 N.W.2d 235, 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that “mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to,” the characteristics in Miller); Parker v. State, | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Fletcher
green
2 sentences2018App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13); 112 So. 3d 1031 (remanding for “a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller”); State v. Hart, 404 S.W.3d 232, 238 (Mo. 2013) (en banc) (holding that the juvenile defendant’s life sentence was unconstitutional because “the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller”); State v. Ali, 855 N.W.2d 235, 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that “mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to,” the characteristics in Miller); Parker v. State, 2017App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13), 112 So.3d 1031 (remanding for "a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller "); State v. Hart , 404 S.W.3d 232 , 238 (Mo. 2013) ( en banc ) (holding that the juvenile defendant's life sentence was unconstitutional because "the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller "); State v. Ali , 855 N.W.2d 235 , 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that "mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to," the characteristics in Miller ); Parker v. | 2 | 2017–2018 |
Berlak v. Villa Scalabrini Home for the Aged, Inc.
green
2 sentences2012Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434 , 103 S.Ct. 1933 ; Berlak, 284 Ill.App.3d at 243 , 219 Ill.Dec. 601 , 671 N.E.2d 768 . ¶ 58 In this case, South Shore attacks both the number of hours and the hourly rates claimed by plaintiff's attorneys as excessive and unreasonable. 2012Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434 , 103 S.Ct. 1933 ; Berlak, 284 Ill.App.3d at 243 , 219 Ill.Dec. 601 , 671 N.E.2d 768 . ¶ 58 In this case, South Shore attacks both the number of hours and the hourly rates claimed by plaintiff's attorneys as excessive and unreasonable. | 2 | 2012–2012 |
Hensley v. Eckerhart
green
2 sentences2012Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434 , 103 S.Ct. 1933 ; Berlak, 284 Ill.App.3d at 243 , 219 Ill.Dec. 601 , 671 N.E.2d 768 . ¶ 58 In this case, South Shore attacks both the number of hours and the hourly rates claimed by plaintiff's attorneys as excessive and unreasonable. 2012Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434 , 103 S.Ct. 1933 ; Berlak, 284 Ill.App.3d at 243 , 219 Ill.Dec. 601 , 671 N.E.2d 768 . ¶ 58 In this case, South Shore attacks both the number of hours and the hourly rates claimed by plaintiff's attorneys as excessive and unreasonable. | 2 | 2012–2012 |
People v. Flores
green
2 sentences1998People v. Guest , 166 Ill. 2d 381, 394 (1995); Flores , 128 Ill. 2d at 106 ; People v. Hillenbrand , 121 Ill. 2d 537, 548 (1988) (mistakes in trial strategy or in judgment alone do not render representation incompetent); People v. Madej , 106 Ill. 2d 201, 214 (1985). 1998People v. Guest, 166 Ill. 2d 381, 394 (1995); Flores, 128 Ill. 2d at 106 ; People v. Hillenbrand, 121 Ill. 2d 537, 548 (1988) (mistakes in trial strategy or in judgment alone do not render representation incompetent); People v. Madej, 106 Ill. 2d 201, 214 (1985). | 2 | 1998–1998 |
Kempe v. Dometic Corp.
green
2 sentences1997Kempe, 866 F. Supp. at 820 , citing 2 Liquor Liability Law § 22.04; 8 Crim. 1997Kempe , 866 F. Supp. at 820 , citing Mosher, 2 Liquor Liability Law §22.04; Roehrenbeck and Russell, 8 Crim.Just. at 18. | 2 | 1997–1997 |
Wyatt L. Bear Cloud v. The State of Wyoming
green
2 sentences2018App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13); 112 So. 3d 1031 (remanding for “a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller”); State v. Hart, 404 S.W.3d 232, 238 (Mo. 2013) (en banc) (holding that the juvenile defendant’s life sentence was unconstitutional because “the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller”); State v. Ali, 855 N.W.2d 235, 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that “mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to,” the characteristics in Miller); Parker v. State, 2018App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13); 112 So. 3d 1031 (remanding for “a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller”); State v. Hart, 404 S.W.3d 232, 238 (Mo. 2013) (en banc) (holding that the juvenile defendant’s life sentence was unconstitutional because “the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller”); State v. Ali, 855 N.W.2d 235, 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that “mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to,” the characteristics in Miller); Parker v. State, | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Aiken v. Byars
green
1 sentence2018App. 2 Cir. 4/10/13); 112 So. 3d 1031 (remanding for “a more thorough review of the appropriate factors enunciated in Miller”); State v. Hart, 404 S.W.3d 232, 238 (Mo. 2013) (en banc) (holding that the juvenile defendant’s life sentence was unconstitutional because “the sentence [must] consider whether this punishment is just and appropriate in light of [his] age, maturity and the other factors discussed in Miller”); State v. Ali, 855 N.W.2d 235, 256-57 (Minn. 2014) (stating that “mitigating circumstances might include, but are not limited to,” the characteristics in Miller); Parker v. State, | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Santiago v. E.W. Bliss Co.
green
1 sentence2012The appellate court in this case correctly recognized that whether and to what extent a litigant should be penalized for seeking recovery under an assumed name requires consideration of a range of factors. 406 Ill. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Yarborough v. Gentry
green
2 sentences2005Yarborough, 540 U.S. at 5-6 , 157 L. 2005Yarborough, 540 U.S. at 5-6 , 157 L. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
In re Marriage of Guntren
green
1 sentence1996In re Marriage of Guntren, 141 Ill. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
George Lange v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company
green
1 sentence1991No error based on the collateral source rule was found by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals: “The evidence concerning Lange’s receipt of workmen’s compensation benefits was relevant to test the credibility of plaintiff’s assertion that he had to return to work immediately after the surgery because he had no disability income. [Citations.] It was also necessary to protect the full range of inquiry allowed by cross-examination, a fundamental part of the adversary system.” (Lange, 703 F.2d at 324 .) Similarly, in Gladden the plaintiff on direct examination had testified that he returned to work | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Alwood v. Mansfield
neutral
1 sentence1905It has been said: “The principles * * * which govern the cases of dealings of persons standing in a fiduciary relation, apply to persons who clothe themselves with a character which brings them within the range of the principle; or, who take instruments, securities or moneys, with notice that they have been obtained by a person filling a position of a fiduciary character, from a person towards whom he stands in such relation. * * * In the aplication of the principles of the court, there is no distinction between the case of one who himself exercises a direct influence, or of another who makes | 1 | 1905–1905 |
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.