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 2 courts 1984–2023 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 |
|---|---|---|
York v. Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Centergreen2 sentences2008Luke's Medical Center, 222 Ill. 2d 147, 204 (2006). 2008Luke’s Medical Center, 222 Ill. 2d 147, 204 (2006). | 2 | 2 |
Hobart v. Shingreen2 sentences2006A trial court is required to use an Illinois pattern jury instruction when it is applicable in a civil case after giving due consideration to the facts and prevailing law, unless the court determines that the instruction does not accurately state the law. 177 Ill.2d R. 239(a); Hobart v. Shin, 185 Ill.2d 283, 294 , 235 Ill.Dec. 724 , 705 N.E.2d 907 (1998). 2006A trial court is required to use an Illinois pattern jury instruction when it is applicable in a civil case after giving due consideration to the facts and prevailing law, unless the court determines that the instruction does not accurately state the law. 177 Ill. 2d R. 239(a); Hobart v. Shin, 185 Ill. 2d 283, 294 (1998). | 2 | 2 |
Schultz v. NORTHEAST ILL. REGIONAL COMMUTER RAILROAD CORP.green2 sentences2021Corp., 201 Ill. 2d 260, 273 (2002), plaintiff contends that a trial court must use an Illinois Pattern Jury instruction when it is applicable. 2021Corp., 201 Ill. 2d 260, 273 (2002), plaintiff contends that a trial court must use an Illinois Pattern Jury instruction when it is applicable. | 1 | 1 |
Davis v. Kraffgreen1 sentence2021Illinois law recognizes “four essential elements a plaintiff must prove in a malpractice action based upon the doctrine of informed consent: ‘(1) the physician had a duty to disclose material risks; (2) he failed to disclose or inadequately disclosed those risks; (3) as a direct and proximate result of the failure to disclose, the patient consented to treatment she otherwise would not have consented to; and (4) plaintiff was injured by the proposed treatment.’ ” Davis v. Kraff, 405 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Childsgreen2 sentences2020Childs, 159 Ill. 2d at 229 (and cases cited therein). ¶ 55 Here, the jury was instructed with the Illinois Pattern Jury instruction regarding the affirmative defense of entrapment, which stated: “It is a defense to the charge made against the defendant that he was entrapped, that is, that for the purpose of obtaining evidence against the defendant, he was incited or induced by an agent of a public officer to commit an offense. 2020Childs, 159 Ill. 2d at 229 (and cases cited therein). ¶ 55 Here, the jury was instructed with the Illinois Pattern Jury instruction regarding the affirmative defense of entrapment, which stated: “It is a defense to the charge made against the defendant that he was entrapped, that is, that for the purpose of obtaining evidence against the defendant, he was incited or induced by an agent of a public officer to commit an offense. | 1 | 1 |
Leonardi v. Loyola University of Chicagogreen2 sentences2009Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions, No. 12.04, Notes on Use (3d ed. 1989); Leonardi, 168 Ill. 2d at 101-02 (instruction proper where there was some evidence of a nonparty’s involvement). 2009Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions, No. 12.04, Notes on Use (3d ed. 1989); Leonardi, 168 Ill. 2d at 101-02 (instruction proper where there was some evidence of a nonparty’s involvement). | 1 | 1 |
Strickland v. Washingtongreen2 sentences1998To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, defendant must show that defense counsel’s representation was “below an objective standard of reasonableness” and that defense counsel’s performance was “prejudicial to the defense.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 692 , 80 L. 1998To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, defendant must show that defense counsel’s representation was “below an objective standard of reasonableness” and that defense counsel’s performance was “prejudicial to the defense.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 692 , 80 L. | 1 | 1 |
Gaines v. Townsendgreen1 sentence1998Gaines v. Townsend , 244 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Hostetter
green
1 sentence2023People v. Hostetter, 384 Ill. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Virginia v. Black
green
2 sentences2018The speaker need not actually intend to carry out the threat." See Black , 538 U.S. at 359 -60 , 123 S.Ct. 1536 ; Dye , 2015 IL App (4th) 130799 , ¶ 9, 394 Ill.Dec. 986 , 37 N.E.3d 465 . 2018The speaker need not actually intend to carry out the threat." See Black , 538 U.S. at 359 -60 , 123 S.Ct. 1536 ; Dye , 2015 IL App (4th) 130799 , ¶ 9, 394 Ill.Dec. 986 , 37 N.E.3d 465 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
People v. Dye
green
2 sentences2018The speaker need not actually intend to carry out the threat." See Black , 538 U.S. at 359 -60 , 123 S.Ct. 1536 ; Dye , 2015 IL App (4th) 130799 , ¶ 9, 394 Ill.Dec. 986 , 37 N.E.3d 465 . 2018The speaker need not actually intend to carry out the threat." See Black , 538 U.S. at 359 -60 , 123 S.Ct. 1536 ; Dye , 2015 IL App (4th) 130799 , ¶ 9, 394 Ill.Dec. 986 , 37 N.E.3d 465 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
In Re Estate of Casey
green
2 sentences1994However, it has been suggested that the term "clear and convincing evidence" be left undefined because its definition is likely to mislead and confuse the jury. ( Casey, 155 Ill.App.3d at 122 , 107 Ill.Dec. at 813 , 507 N.E.2d at 966 .) There is no Illinois Pattern Jury instruction which defines the "clear and convincing" standard and Illinois courts appear to have utilized as many definitions as there are attorneys to propose them. 1994However, it has been suggested that the term "clear and convincing evidence" be left undefined because its definition is likely to mislead and confuse the jury. ( Casey, 155 Ill.App.3d at 122 , 107 Ill.Dec. at 813 , 507 N.E.2d at 966 .) There is no Illinois Pattern Jury instruction which defines the "clear and convincing" standard and Illinois courts appear to have utilized as many definitions as there are attorneys to propose them. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Williams v. Brown Manufacturing Co.
green
2 sentences1984(Williams v. Brown Manufacturing Co. (1970), 45 Ill. 2d 418, 430 , 261 N.E.2d 305 .) Specifically, the Illinois pattern jury instruction on assumption of risk pursuant to a contractual relationship requires proof that “the plaintiff knew these dangers [which caused the injury] existed and realized the possibility of injury from them or in the exercise of ordinary care would have known the dangers existed and realized the possibility of injury from them and entered into the [contract] voluntarily.” Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions, Civil, No. 13.01 (2d ed. 1971). 1984(Williams v. Brown Manufacturing Co. (1970), 45 Ill. 2d 418, 430 , 261 N.E.2d 305 .) Specifically, the Illinois pattern jury instruction on assumption of risk pursuant to a contractual relationship requires proof that “the plaintiff knew these dangers [which caused the injury] existed and realized the possibility of injury from them or in the exercise of ordinary care would have known the dangers existed and realized the possibility of injury from them and entered into the [contract] voluntarily.” Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions, Civil, No. 13.01 (2d ed. 1971). | 1 | 1984–1984 |