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.
13 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 1988–2022 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
State Ex Rel. Kaufman v. Zakaibgreen2 sentences2005Kaufman , 535 S.E.2d at 735 ("The Court is mindful that this protection from discovery proceedings has its limits, and those limits are that a judge must be acting as a judge, and that it is information regarding his or her role as a judge that is sought"). 2005Kaufman, 207 W Va. at_, 535 S.E.2d at 735 (“The Court is mindful that this protection from discovery proceedings has its limits, and those limits are that a judge must be acting as a judge, and that it is information regarding his or her role as a judge that is sought”). | 2 | 2 |
Adco Services, Inc. v. Bullardgreen2 sentences2022Adco Services, Inc. v. Bullard, 256 Ill. 1995Adco Services, Inc. v. Bullard (1993), 256 Ill. | 1 | 2 |
Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co.green1 sentence2009Solaia Technology, 221 Ill. 2d at 580-81, 585 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Barakat v. Matz
green
2 sentences2006Barakat v. Matz, 271 Ill. 2006Barakat v. Matz, 271 Ill. | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Larson v. Doner
green
2 sentences2003The court noted that absolute privilege bars defamation actions for statements made by public officials during legislative proceedings, citing Larson v. Donner, 32 Ill. 2003The court noted that absolute privilege bars defamation actions for statements made by public officials during legislative proceedings, citing Larson v. Doner, 32 Ill.App.2d 471 , 178 N.E.2d 399 (1961), and Loniello v. Fitzgerald, 42 Ill.App.3d 900 , 1 Ill.Dec. 560 , 356 N.E.2d 842 (1976). | 2 | 2003–2003 |
Dent v. Constellation NewEnergy, Inc.
green
1 sentence2022“A privileged communication is one that might be defamatory and actionable except for the occasion on which, or the circumstances under which, it is made.” Dent v. Constellation NewEnergy, Inc., 2022 IL 126795, ¶ 30 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Sandholm v. Kuecker
green
1 sentence2012The supreme court allowed the plaintiff’s petition for leave to appeal. ¶ 26 The supreme court determined that the legislature intended the Act “to target only meritless, retaliatory SLAPPs and did not intend to establish a new absolute or qualified privilege for defamation.” Sandholm, 2012 IL 111443, ¶ 50 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Loniello v. Fitzgerald
green
2 sentences2003The court noted that absolute privilege bars defamation actions for statements made by public officials during legislative proceedings, citing Larson v. Doner, 32 Ill.App.2d 471 , 178 N.E.2d 399 (1961), and Loniello v. Fitzgerald, 42 Ill.App.3d 900 , 1 Ill.Dec. 560 , 356 N.E.2d 842 (1976). 2003The court noted that absolute privilege bars defamation actions for statements made by public officials during legislative proceedings, citing Larson v. Doner, 32 Ill.App.2d 471 , 178 N.E.2d 399 (1961), and Loniello v. Fitzgerald, 42 Ill.App.3d 900 , 1 Ill.Dec. 560 , 356 N.E.2d 842 (1976). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Savarirayan v. English
neutral
1 sentence1993In support thereof, defendant cites Savarirayan v. English (1977), 45 Ill. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Judge v. Rockford Memorial Hospital
green
1 sentence1988A privileged communication has been defined as “one which, except for the occasion on which or the circumstances under which it is made, might be defamatory and actionable.” (Judge v. Rockford Memorial Hospital (1958), 17 Ill. | 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.