100 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1906–2025 7 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 |
|---|---|---|
Robidoux v. Oliphantgreen2 sentences2019Jan. 4, 2013), an affidavit submitted in connection with a motion for summary judgment “shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all documents upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” “An affidavit submitted in the summary judgment context serves as a substitute 2015July 1, 2002), which provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "Affidavits in support of and in opposition to a motion for summary judgment under section 2-1005 of the Code of Civil Procedure *** shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all papers upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can tes | 5 | 8 |
Cammon v. West Suburban Hospital Medical Centergreen2 sentences2007App. 3d at 391 , citing Common v. West Suburban Hospital Medical Center, 301 Ill. 2007App.3d at 391 , 273 Ill.Dec. 610 , 789 N.E.2d 784 , citing Cammon v. West Suburban Hospital Medical Center, 301 Ill.App.3d 939, 946 , 235 Ill.Dec. 158 , 704 N.E.2d 731 (1998), and Wolf v. Meister-Neiberg, Inc., 143 Ill.2d 44, 46-48 , 155 Ill.Dec. 814 , 570 N.E.2d 327 (1991). | 4 | 5 |
Wilson v. Clarkgreen2 sentences2015At trial, an expert may give an opinion without first disclosing the facts underlying that opinion (Wilson v. Clark, 84 Ill. 2d 186, 194 , 417 N.E.2d 1322, 1326 (1981)) because the opposing party has the opportunity to cross-examine the expert as to the basis of his opinion. 2015At trial, an expert may give an opinion without first disclosing the facts underlying that opinion (Wilson v. Clark, 84 Ill. 2d 186, 194 , 417 N.E.2d 1322, 1326 (1981)) because the opposing party has the opportunity to cross-examine the expert as to the basis of his opinion. | 2 | 4 |
Kugler v. Southmark Realty Partners IIIgreen2 sentences2007“If, from the document as a whole, it appears that the affidavit is based upon the personal knowledge of the affiant and there is a reasonable inference that the affiant could competently testify to its contents at trial, Rule 191 is satisfied.” Kugler v. Southmark Realty Partners III, 309 Ill. 2007“If, from the document as a whole, it appears that the affidavit is based upon the personal knowledge of the affiant and there is a reasonable inference that the affiant could competently testify to its contents at trial, Rule 191 is satisfied.” Kugler v. Southmark Realty Partners III, 309 Ill. | 2 | 4 |
Go-Tane Service Stations, Inc. v. Sharpgreen2 sentences2006Go-Tane Service Stations, Inc., 78 Ill. 2006Go- Tane Service Stations, Inc., 78 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
Cordeck Sales, Inc. v. Construction Systems, Inc.green2 sentences2022The rule requires that affidavits “be made on the personal knowledge of the affiant[ ]” and “set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based.” Id. “[A]ffidavits that are conclusory and fail to state facts with particularity do not strictly comply with Rule 191(a) and may be stricken.” Cordeck Sales Inc. v. Construction Systems, Inc., 382 Ill. 2009"Accordingly, affidavits that are conclusory and fail to state facts with particularity do not strictly comply with Rule 191(a) and may be stricken." Cordeck I, 382 Ill.App.3d at 382 , 320 Ill.Dec. 330 , 887 N.E.2d 474 , citing Robidoux v. Oliphant, 201 Ill.2d 324, 336 , 266 Ill.Dec. 915 , 775 N.E.2d 987 (2002). | 1 | 2 |
Stephens v. Northern Indiana Public Service Co.green2 sentences2018(Internal quotation marks omitted.) Stephens v. Northern Indiana Public Service Co., 87 Ill. 2018(Internal quotation marks omitted.) Stephens v. Northern Indiana Public Service Co. , 87 Ill. | 1 | 2 |
Anderson v. Human Rights Commissiongreen1 sentence2025Jan. 4, 2013) generally provides that affidavits in support of a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment “shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all documents upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” ¶ 17 Furthermore, “[i]n civil cases in Illinois, | 1 | 1 |
Griffin v. Universal Casualty Co.green1 sentence2022Jan. 4, 2013) (“shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; *** and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto”); see also 735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2018) (“Unless otherwise expressly provided by rule of the Supreme Court, whenever in this Code any *** affidavit, return or proof of service, or other document or pleading filed in any court of this State is required or permitted to be verified, or made, sworn to or verified under o | 1 | 1 |
U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. Gaguagreen1 sentence2020Among the requirements of the rule, the affidavits “shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim *** is based,” “shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence,” and “shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” Id. “ ‘An affidavit satisfies the requirements of Rule 191(a) if from the document as a whole it appears the affidavit is based on the personal knowledge of the affiant and there is a reasonable inference that the affiant could competently testify to its contents.’ ” U.S. Bank National Ass | 1 | 1 |
| Solon v. Godbolegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Jackson v. Grahamgreen | 1 | 1 |
| American Service Insurance v. China Ocean Shipping Co. (Americas), Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Farmers Automobile Insurance Association v. Neumanngreen | 1 | 1 |
| Cambridge Engineering, Inc. v. Mercury Partners 90 BI, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Preze v. Borden Chemical, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Pritchett v. Asbestos Claims Management Corp.green | 1 | 1 |
| Millsaps v. Bankers Life Co.green | 1 | 1 |
| Dietz v. Spallagreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Allied American Insurance v. Mickiewicz
green
2 sentences1989App.3d 705 , 464 N.E.2d 1112 .) Rule 191(a), which governs affidavits in summary judgment proceedings, states the following, in pertinent part: "Affidavits in support of and in opposition to a motion for summary judgment * * * shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all papers upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant 1989App. 3d 705 , 464 N.E.2d 1112 .) Rule 191(a), which governs affidavits in summary judgment proceedings, states the following, in pertinent part: “Affidavits in support of and in opposition to a motion for summary judgment *** shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all papers upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, | 4 | 1989–2001 |
Castro v. Bellucci
green
2 sentences2007“Central to this inquiry is whether the record reveals that the defendant was on notice, before the expiration of the [limitations] period, of the facts upon which the claim set out in the amended complaint is based.” Bellucci, 338 Ill. 2007"Central to this inquiry is whether the record reveals that the defendant was on notice, before the expiration of the [limitations] period, of the facts upon which the claim set out in the amended complaint is based." Bellucci, 338 Ill. | 3 | 2007–2007 |
Wolf v. Meister-Neiberg, Inc.
green
2 sentences2007App.3d at 391 , 273 Ill.Dec. 610 , 789 N.E.2d 784 , citing Cammon v. West Suburban Hospital Medical Center, 301 Ill.App.3d 939, 946 , 235 Ill.Dec. 158 , 704 N.E.2d 731 (1998), and Wolf v. Meister-Neiberg, Inc., 143 Ill.2d 44, 46-48 , 155 Ill.Dec. 814 , 570 N.E.2d 327 (1991). 2007App.3d at 391 , 273 Ill.Dec. 610 , 789 N.E.2d 784 , citing Cammon v. West Suburban Hospital Medical Center, 301 Ill.App.3d 939, 946 , 235 Ill.Dec. 158 , 704 N.E.2d 731 (1998), and Wolf v. Meister-Neiberg, Inc., 143 Ill.2d 44, 46-48 , 155 Ill.Dec. 814 , 570 N.E.2d 327 (1991). | 3 | 1998–2007 |
Quaintance Associates, Inc. v. PLM, INC.
green
2 sentences2002Quaintance Associates, Inc. v. PLM, Inc., 95 Ill. 2002Quaintance Associates, Inc. v. PLM, Inc. , 95 Ill. | 3 | 1993–2002 |
Mitchell v. Simms
green
2 sentences1991App. 3d 215, 219 , 398 N.E.2d 211 .) As a general rule, to charge a party with laches, it is essential that the party have knowledge of the facts upon which his claim is based yet fail to proceed in a timely manner. 1990In arguing that his delay in bringing suit was reasonable, plaintiff notes that laches arises where there is, inter alia, a delay despite a plaintiff’s knowledge of the facts upon which his claim is based (Mitchell v. Simms (1979), 79 Ill. | 3 | 1982–1991 |
US Bank v. Avdic
green
2 sentences2025US Bank, National Ass’n v. Avdic, 2014 IL App (1st) 121759, ¶ 22 . 2020US Bank, National Ass’n v. Avdic, 2014 IL App (1st) 121759, ¶ 22 . | 2 | 2020–2025 |
Western Illinois Oil Co. v. Thompson
green
2 sentences2017The rule states that affidavits: “shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all documents upon which the affiant - 17 - relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” Id. ¶ 79 Because affidavits submitted in the summary judgment context serve as a substitute for testimony at trial, affidavi 2017The rule states that affidavits: “shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all documents upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” Id. ¶ 79 Because affidavits submitted in the summary judgment context serve as a substitute for testimony at trial, affidavits must | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Richter v. Prairie Farms Dairy
green
2 sentences2017Jan. 4, 2013) sets forth the requirements for - 17 affidavits supporting a section 2-619 motion to dismiss, providing as follows: “[Affidavits] shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all documents upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” ¶ 41 “In ruling on 2017Jan. 4, 2013) sets forth the requirements for - 17 affidavits supporting a section 2-619 motion to dismiss, providing as follows: “[Affidavits] shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all documents upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” ¶ 41 “In ruling on | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Doria v. Village of Downers Grove
green
2 sentences2010If all of the facts to be shown are not within the personal knowledge of one person, two or more affidavits shall be used.” 210 Ill. 2d R. 191(a). “ ‘[I]f, from the document as a whole, it appears that the affidavit is based upon the personal knowledge of the affiant and there is a reasonable inference that the affiant could competently testify to its contents at trial, Rule 191 is satisfied.’ ” Doria v. Village of Downers Grove, 397 Ill. 2010If all of the facts to be shown are not within the personal knowledge of one person, two or more affidavits shall be used.” 210 Ill. 2d R. 191(a). “ ‘[I]f, from the document as a whole, it appears that the affidavit is based upon the personal knowledge of the affiant and there is a reasonable inference that the affiant could competently testify to its contents at trial, Rule 191 is satisfied.’ ” Doria v. Village of Downers Grove, 397 Ill. | 2 | 2010–2010 |
Redfield v. Continental Casualty
green
2 sentences2004"As a consequence, a plaintiff in federal court need not set out in detail the facts upon which his claim is based." Redfield , 818 F.2d at 605 . 2004“As a consequence, a plaintiff in federal court need not set out in detail the facts upon which his claim is based.” Redfield, 818 F.2d at 605 . | 2 | 2004–2004 |
Northrop v. Lopatka
green
2 sentences2001Because Halpin’s affidavit was conclusory and did not include the facts upon which he based his opinions, the affidavit did not comply with Rule 191. 145 Ill. 2d R. 191; Northrop v. Lopatka, 242 Ill. 2001Because Halpin's affidavit was conclusory and did not include the facts upon which he based his opinions, the affidavit did not comply with Rule 191. 145 Ill. 2d R. 191; Northrop v. Lopatka , 242 Ill. | 2 | 2001–2001 |
Zegers v. Zegers, Inc.
green
2 sentences1991(Zegers v. Zegers, Inc. (1976), 38 Ill. 1979Zegers v. Zegers, Inc. (1976), 38 Ill. | 2 | 1979–1991 |
Suntrust Mortgage, Inc. v. Ulrich
neutral
1 sentence2025Jan. 4, 2013) provides that affidavits submitted in support of a motion for summary judgment shall (1) be made on the personal knowledge of the affiant, (2) set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim is based, (3) have attached thereto certified copies of documents on which the affiant relies, (4) consist of admissible facts rather than conclusions, and (5) affirm the affiant’s competence to testify to the contents of the affidavit.” Suntrus Mortgage, Inc. v. Ulrich, 2021 IL App (2d) 200294, ¶ 17 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
In Re Estate of Rennick
green
1 sentence2022The rule requires that affidavits “be made on the personal knowledge of the affiant[ ]” and “set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based.” Id. “[A]ffidavits that are conclusory and fail to state facts with particularity do not strictly comply with Rule 191(a) and may be stricken.” Cordeck Sales Inc. v. Construction Systems, Inc., 382 Ill. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Weiss
green
1 sentence2022App. 3d 1056, 1063 (1995) (citing Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Weiss, 238 Ill. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Lewis v. Lead Industries Ass'n
green
1 sentence2022Id. ¶ 48 “Affidavits in support of and in opposition to a motion for summary judgment *** shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all documents upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” Ill. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company
green
1 sentence2021Under Supreme Court Rule 191, affidavits submitted in connection with a motion for summary judgment “shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with 4 1-19-0608 particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all documents upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” Id. ¶ 13 Defendant argues that Michael Bennett’s aff | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Brettman v. Virgil Cook & Son, Inc.
green
1 sentence2020Jan. 4, 2013) provides in pertinent part: “Affidavits in support of and in opposition to a motion for summary judgment under section 2-1005 of the Code of Civil Procedure *** shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, - 23 - 2020 IL App (2d) 190955 counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all documents upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a wi | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Doe v. Coe
green
1 sentence2020Among the requirements of the rule, the affidavits “shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim *** is based,” “shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence,” and “shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” Id. “ ‘An affidavit satisfies the requirements of Rule 191(a) if from the document as a whole it appears the affidavit is based on the personal knowledge of the affiant and there is a reasonable inference that the affiant could competently testify to its contents.’ ” U.S. Bank National Ass | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Safeway Insurance Co. v. Ebijimi green | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Snow v. Power Construction Co., LLC
green
1 sentence2019Snow v. Power Construction Co., LLC, 2017 IL App (1st) 151226, ¶ 79 . ¶ 22 Rule 191(a) provides that affidavits in opposition to a motion for summary judgment “shall be made on the personal knowledge of the affiants; shall set forth with particularity the facts upon which the claim, counterclaim, or defense is based; shall have attached thereto sworn or certified copies of all documents upon which the affiant relies; shall not consist of conclusions but of facts admissible in evidence; and shall affirmatively show that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” An af | 1 | 2019–2019 |
| Madden v. F.H. Paschen/S.N. Nielson, Inc. green | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| Doe v. Coe green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. East-West Logistics, L.L.C. green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| D'Attomo v. Baumbeck green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Burge v. Exelon Generation Company, LLC green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Fields v. Schaumburg Firefighters' Pension Board green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| Stratman v. Brent green | 1 | 2007–2007 |
| Rinchich v. Village of Bridgeview green | 1 | 1996–1996 |
| Canzoneri v. Village of Franklin Park green | 1 | 1996–1996 |
| Lamkin v. Towner green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Anderson \Safeway\" Guard Rail Corp. v. Champaign Asphalt Co." green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Patterson v. Stern green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Streams Club, Ltd. v. Thompson green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| People v. Robinson green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Oak Trust & Savings Bank v. Annerino green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Pyle v. Ferrell green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Bobin v. Tauber green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Manuel v. McKissack neutral | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| People v. Johnson green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
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.