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.
12 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2019 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Gilbert v. National Cash Register Co.green2 sentences2019People v. Four Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars ($4,850) United States Currency, 2011 IL App (4th) 100528, ¶ 17 ; Gilbert v. National Cash Register Co., 176 Ill. 288, 297 (1898) (“The party in possession of personal property is presumed to be the owner of it, possession being one of the strongest evidences of title to personal property.”). ¶ 10 But if the party challenging the presumption of ownership arising from possession presents evidence to rebut the presumption, the presumption ceases to exist. “[O]nce evidence is introduced contrary to the presumption, the bubble bursts and the pres 2018People v. Four Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars ($4,850) United States Currency , 2011 IL App (4th) 100528 , ¶ 17, 352 Ill.Dec. 33 , 952 N.E.2d 1259 ; Gilbert v. National Cash-Register Co. , 176 Ill. 288 , 297, 52 N.E. 22 (1898) ("The party in possession of personal property is presumed to be the owner of it, possession being one of the strongest evidences of title to personal property."). ¶ 10 But if the party challenging the presumption of ownership arising from possession presents evidence to rebut the presumption, the presumption ceases to exist. "[O]nce evidence is introduced contrary | 2 | 2 |
Franciscan Sisters Health Care Corp. v. Deangreen2 sentences2019People v. Four Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars ($4,850) United States Currency, 2011 IL App (4th) 100528, ¶ 17 ; Gilbert v. National Cash Register Co., 176 Ill. 288, 297 (1898) (“The party in possession of personal property is presumed to be the owner of it, possession being one of the strongest evidences of title to personal property.”). ¶ 10 But if the party challenging the presumption of ownership arising from possession presents evidence to rebut the presumption, the presumption ceases to exist. “[O]nce evidence is introduced contrary to the presumption, the bubble bursts and the pres 2018People v. Four Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars ($4,850) United States Currency , 2011 IL App (4th) 100528 , ¶ 17, 352 Ill.Dec. 33 , 952 N.E.2d 1259 ; Gilbert v. National Cash-Register Co. , 176 Ill. 288 , 297, 52 N.E. 22 (1898) ("The party in possession of personal property is presumed to be the owner of it, possession being one of the strongest evidences of title to personal property."). ¶ 10 But if the party challenging the presumption of ownership arising from possession presents evidence to rebut the presumption, the presumption ceases to exist. "[O]nce evidence is introduced contrary | 1 | 8 |
Swiecicki v. Swiecickigreen2 sentences2019People v. Four Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars ($4,850) United States Currency, 2011 IL App (4th) 100528, ¶ 17 ; Gilbert v. National Cash Register Co., 176 Ill. 288, 297 (1898) (“The party in possession of personal property is presumed to be the owner of it, possession being one of the strongest evidences of title to personal property.”). ¶ 10 But if the party challenging the presumption of ownership arising from possession presents evidence to rebut the presumption, the presumption ceases to exist. “[O]nce evidence is introduced contrary to the presumption, the bubble bursts and the pres 2018People v. Four Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars ($4,850) United States Currency , 2011 IL App (4th) 100528 , ¶ 17, 352 Ill.Dec. 33 , 952 N.E.2d 1259 ; Gilbert v. National Cash-Register Co. , 176 Ill. 288 , 297, 52 N.E. 22 (1898) ("The party in possession of personal property is presumed to be the owner of it, possession being one of the strongest evidences of title to personal property."). ¶ 10 But if the party challenging the presumption of ownership arising from possession presents evidence to rebut the presumption, the presumption ceases to exist. "[O]nce evidence is introduced contrary | 1 | 2 |
Coal Creek Drainage & Levee District v. Sanitary Districtgreen1 sentence1983(McCormick, Evidence sec. 345, at 821 (2d ed. 1972); see Coal Creek Drainage & Levee District v. Sanitary District (1929), 336 Ill. 11 .) It is consistent with the Thayer approach that the party producing evidence to rebut the presumption must come forward with evidence that is “sufficient to support a finding of the nonexistence of the presumed fact.” (Graham, Presumptions in Civil Cases in Illinois: Do They Exist? 1977 S. 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 |
|---|---|---|
Diederich v. Walters
green
2 sentences1990That court stated: "The prevailing theory regarding presumptions that Illinois follows and Diederich [ v. Walters, 65 Ill.2d 95 , 2 Ill.Dec. *1216 685, 357 N.E.2d 1128 (1976)] speaks about is Thayer's bursting-bubble hypothesis: once evidence is introduced contrary to the presumption, the bubble bursts and the presumption vanishes. [Citations.] It is consistent with the Thayer approach that the party producing evidence to rebut the presumption must come forward with evidence that is `sufficient to support a finding of the nonexistence of the presumed fact.' [Citation.] * * * The amount of evid 1990That court stated: "The prevailing theory regarding presumptions that Illinois follows and Diederich [ v. Walters, 65 Ill.2d 95 , 2 Ill.Dec. *1216 685, 357 N.E.2d 1128 (1976)] speaks about is Thayer's bursting-bubble hypothesis: once evidence is introduced contrary to the presumption, the bubble bursts and the presumption vanishes. [Citations.] It is consistent with the Thayer approach that the party producing evidence to rebut the presumption must come forward with evidence that is `sufficient to support a finding of the nonexistence of the presumed fact.' [Citation.] * * * The amount of evid | 3 | 1984–1990 |
People v. Four Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars
green
2 sentences2019People v. Four Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars ($4,850) United States Currency, 2011 IL App (4th) 100528, ¶ 17 ; Gilbert v. National Cash Register Co., 176 Ill. 288, 297 (1898) (“The party in possession of personal property is presumed to be the owner of it, possession being one of the strongest evidences of title to personal property.”). ¶ 10 But if the party challenging the presumption of ownership arising from possession presents evidence to rebut the presumption, the presumption ceases to exist. “[O]nce evidence is introduced contrary to the presumption, the bubble bursts and the pres 2018People v. Four Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars ($4,850) United States Currency , 2011 IL App (4th) 100528 , ¶ 17, 352 Ill.Dec. 33 , 952 N.E.2d 1259 ; Gilbert v. National Cash-Register Co. , 176 Ill. 288 , 297, 52 N.E. 22 (1898) ("The party in possession of personal property is presumed to be the owner of it, possession being one of the strongest evidences of title to personal property."). ¶ 10 But if the party challenging the presumption of ownership arising from possession presents evidence to rebut the presumption, the presumption ceases to exist. "[O]nce evidence is introduced contrary | 2 | 2018–2019 |
Lehman v. Stephens
green
2 sentences2003On the other hand, if no evidence is introduced to the contrary, then the prima facie case created under the presumption will prevail, and the defendants would be entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Lehman, 148 Ill. 2003On the other hand, if no evidence is introduced to the contrary, then the prima facie case created under the presumption will prevail, and the defendants would be entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Lehman , 148 Ill. | 2 | 2003–2003 |