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 1975–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Higgins v. Assmann Electronics, Inc.green2 sentences2020See Ballinger v. Delaware River Port Authority, 800 A.2d 97, 110 (N.J. 2002); Higgins v. Assmann Electronics, Inc., 173 P.3d 453, 458 (Ariz. 2007); Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmont, 289 S.E.2d 692, 699 (W. 2020See Ballinger v. Delaware River Port Authority, 800 A.2d 97, 110 (N.J. 2002); Higgins v. Assmann Electronics, Inc., 173 P.3d 453, 458 (Ariz. 2007); Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmont, 289 S.E.2d 692, 699 (W. | 2 | 2 |
Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmontgreen2 sentences2020See Ballinger v. Delaware River Port Authority, 800 A.2d 97, 110 (N.J. 2002); Higgins v. Assmann Electronics, Inc., 173 P.3d 453, 458 (Ariz. 2007); Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmont, 289 S.E.2d 692, 699 (W. 2020See Ballinger v. Delaware River Port Authority, 800 A.2d 97, 110 (N.J. 2002); Higgins v. Assmann Electronics, Inc., 173 P.3d 453, 458 (Ariz. 2007); Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmont, 289 S.E.2d 692, 699 (W. | 2 | 2 |
Ballinger v. Delaware River Port Authoritygreen2 sentences2020See Ballinger v. Delaware River Port Authority, 800 A.2d 97, 110 (N.J. 2002); Higgins v. Assmann Electronics, Inc., 173 P.3d 453, 458 (Ariz. 2007); Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmont, 289 S.E.2d 692, 699 (W. 2020See Ballinger v. Delaware River Port Authority, 800 A.2d 97, 110 (N.J. 2002); Higgins v. Assmann Electronics, Inc., 173 P.3d 453, 458 (Ariz. 2007); Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmont, 289 S.E.2d 692, 699 (W. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Currie v. Lao
green
2 sentences2004“The reasoning underlying this rule is apparent: negligence that arises from the ordinary operation of a motor vehicle is based on the breach of the duties every driver owes to every other driver.” Currie, 148 Ill. 2d at 160 , 592 N.E.2d at 980-81 . 2004“The reasoning underlying this rule is apparent: negligence that arises from the ordinary operation of a motor vehicle is based on the breach of the duties every driver owes to every other driver.” Currie, 148 Ill. 2d at 160 , 592 N.E.2d at 980-81 . | 3 | 1993–2004 |
Central Illinois Public Service Co. v. Allianz Underwriters Insurance
green
2 sentences2003Central Illinois , 244 Ill. 2003Central Illinois, 244 Ill. | 2 | 2003–2003 |
People v. Evans
green
2 sentences1993The reasoning underlying the exception is that it is entirely natural that the victim of a forcible sexual assault would speak out regarding it and, conversely, that the failure to do so would, in effect, be evidence that nothing violent had occurred.” People v. Evans (1988), 173 Ill. 1991App. 3d 186, 199 , 527 N.E.2d 448 .) “The reasoning underlying the exception is that it is entirely natural that the victim of a forcible sexual assault would speak out regarding it and, conversely, that the failure to do so would, in effect, be evidence that nothing violent had occurred.” In such cases, the prompt complaint is used to corroborate the complainant’s testimony. | 2 | 1991–1993 |
Bartholomew v. Crockett
green
1 sentence1992(Bartholomew, 131 Ill. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
The People v. Damen
green
1 sentence1988(People v. Damen (1963), 28 Ill. 2d 464 , 193 N.E.2d 25 ; People v. Nelson (1986), 148 Ill. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
People v. Nelson
green
1 sentence1988(People v. Damen (1963), 28 Ill. 2d 464 , 193 N.E.2d 25 ; People v. Nelson (1986), 148 Ill. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Washington Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Hammett
green
2 sentences1975Plaintiff is urging this court to adopt a theory of recovery commonly known as the “fund-doctrine.” This has been defined as “the equitable concept that an attorney who renders service in creating a trust fund may in equity be allowed compensation out of the whole fund from those who directly benefit from its accumulation.” (Geline, 48 Wis.2d 290, 298 , 179 N.W.2d 815, 819 .) The reasoning underlying this doctrine was enunciated in Washington Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Hammett (1964), 237 Ark. 954, 956-57 , 377 S.W.2d 811, 813 , wherein it was stated: “The appellant’s real grievance lies i 1975Plaintiff is urging this court to adopt a theory of recovery commonly known as the “fund-doctrine.” This has been defined as “the equitable concept that an attorney who renders service in creating a trust fund may in equity be allowed compensation out of the whole fund from those who directly benefit from its accumulation.” (Geline, 48 Wis.2d 290, 298 , 179 N.W.2d 815, 819 .) The reasoning underlying this doctrine was enunciated in Washington Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Hammett (1964), 237 Ark. 954, 956-57 , 377 S.W.2d 811, 813 , wherein it was stated: “The appellant’s real grievance lies i | 1 | 1975–1975 |
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Geline
green
2 sentences1975Plaintiff is urging this court to adopt a theory of recovery commonly known as the “fund-doctrine.” This has been defined as “the equitable concept that an attorney who renders service in creating a trust fund may in equity be allowed compensation out of the whole fund from those who directly benefit from its accumulation.” (Geline, 48 Wis.2d 290, 298 , 179 N.W.2d 815, 819 .) The reasoning underlying this doctrine was enunciated in Washington Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Hammett (1964), 237 Ark. 954, 956-57 , 377 S.W.2d 811, 813 , wherein it was stated: “The appellant’s real grievance lies i 1975Plaintiff is urging this court to adopt a theory of recovery commonly known as the “fund-doctrine.” This has been defined as “the equitable concept that an attorney who renders service in creating a trust fund may in equity be allowed compensation out of the whole fund from those who directly benefit from its accumulation.” (Geline, 48 Wis.2d 290, 298 , 179 N.W.2d 815, 819 .) The reasoning underlying this doctrine was enunciated in Washington Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Hammett (1964), 237 Ark. 954, 956-57 , 377 S.W.2d 811, 813 , wherein it was stated: “The appellant’s real grievance lies i | 1 | 1975–1975 |
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.