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.
8 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2026 6 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 |
|---|---|---|
People v. Rungegreen2 sentences2025“The party to be estopped must have (1) taken two positions, (2) that are factually inconsistent, (3) in separate judicial or quasi-judicial administrative proceedings, (4) intending for the trier of fact to accept the truth of the facts alleged, and (5) have succeeded in the first proceeding and received some benefit from it.” Seymour, 2015 IL 118432, ¶ 37 (citing Runge, 234 Ill. 2d at 132 ). 2023Id. ¶ 37 (citing People v. Runge, 234 Ill. 2d 68, 132 (2009), People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569, 598 (2006), and People v. Caballero, 206 Ill. 2d 65, 80 (2002)). ¶ 23 However, even where the above prerequisites are found, the party’s inconsistent positions must have resulted from an “intent to deceive or mislead,” rather than “inadvertence or mistake.” Id. ¶ 47 (citing Jaeger v. Clear Wing Productions, Inc., 465 F. Supp. 2d 879, 882 (S.D. | 2 | 3 |
Jaeger v. Clear Wing Productions, Inc.green2 sentences2023Id. ¶ 37 (citing People v. Runge, 234 Ill. 2d 68, 132 (2009), People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569, 598 (2006), and People v. Caballero, 206 Ill. 2d 65, 80 (2002)). ¶ 23 However, even where the above prerequisites are found, the party’s inconsistent positions must have resulted from an “intent to deceive or mislead,” rather than “inadvertence or mistake.” Id. ¶ 47 (citing Jaeger v. Clear Wing Productions, Inc., 465 F. Supp. 2d 879, 882 (S.D. 2023Id. ¶ 37 (citing People v. Runge, 234 Ill. 2d 68, 132 (2009), People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569, 598 (2006), and People v. Caballero, 206 Ill. 2d 65, 80 (2002)). ¶ 23 However, even where the above prerequisites are found, the party’s inconsistent positions must have resulted from an “intent to deceive or mislead,” rather than “inadvertence or mistake.” Id. ¶ 47 (citing Jaeger v. Clear Wing Productions, Inc., 465 F. Supp. 2d 879, 882 (S.D. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Armstronggreen2 sentences2006See People v. Armstrong, 183 Ill. 2d 130, 151 , 700 N.E.2d 960, 969 (1998). 2006See People v. Armstrong, 183 Ill. 2d 130, 151 , 700 N.E.2d 960, 969 (1998). | 2 | 2 |
Seymour v. Collinsgreen2 sentences2026“Judicial estoppel applies in a judicial proceeding when litigants take a position, benefit from that position, and then seek to take a contrary position in a later proceeding.” Id. ¶ 79 Five prerequisites are generally required before a court may invoke the doctrine of judicial estoppel: “The party to be estopped must have (1) taken two positions, (2) that are factually inconsistent, (3) in separate judicial or quasi-judicial administrative proceedings, (4) intending for the trier of fact to accept the truth of the facts alleged, and (5) have succeeded in the first proceeding and received som 2025The Illinois Supreme Court “has identified five prerequisites as ‘generally required’ before a court may invoke the doctrine of judicial estoppel.” Seymour v. Collins, 2015 IL 118432, ¶ 37 . | 1 | 6 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Caballero
green
2 sentences2023Id. ¶ 37 (citing People v. Runge, 234 Ill. 2d 68, 132 (2009), People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569, 598 (2006), and People v. Caballero, 206 Ill. 2d 65, 80 (2002)). ¶ 23 However, even where the above prerequisites are found, the party’s inconsistent positions must have resulted from an “intent to deceive or mislead,” rather than “inadvertence or mistake.” Id. ¶ 47 (citing Jaeger v. Clear Wing Productions, Inc., 465 F. Supp. 2d 879, 882 (S.D. 2023Id. ¶ 37 (citing People v. Runge, 234 Ill. 2d 68, 132 (2009), People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569, 598 (2006), and People v. Caballero, 206 Ill. 2d 65, 80 (2002)). ¶ 23 However, even where the above prerequisites are found, the party’s inconsistent positions must have resulted from an “intent to deceive or mislead,” rather than “inadvertence or mistake.” Id. ¶ 47 (citing Jaeger v. Clear Wing Productions, Inc., 465 F. Supp. 2d 879, 882 (S.D. | 2 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Jones
green
2 sentences2023Id. ¶ 37 (citing People v. Runge, 234 Ill. 2d 68, 132 (2009), People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569, 598 (2006), and People v. Caballero, 206 Ill. 2d 65, 80 (2002)). ¶ 23 However, even where the above prerequisites are found, the party’s inconsistent positions must have resulted from an “intent to deceive or mislead,” rather than “inadvertence or mistake.” Id. ¶ 47 (citing Jaeger v. Clear Wing Productions, Inc., 465 F. Supp. 2d 879, 882 (S.D. 2023Id. ¶ 37 (citing People v. Runge, 234 Ill. 2d 68, 132 (2009), People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569, 598 (2006), and People v. Caballero, 206 Ill. 2d 65, 80 (2002)). ¶ 23 However, even where the above prerequisites are found, the party’s inconsistent positions must have resulted from an “intent to deceive or mislead,” rather than “inadvertence or mistake.” Id. ¶ 47 (citing Jaeger v. Clear Wing Productions, Inc., 465 F. Supp. 2d 879, 882 (S.D. | 2 | 2023–2023 |
Colon v. Illinois Central R.R. Co.
green
1 sentence2025Co., 2024 IL App (1st) 221841, ¶ 57 . ¶ 80 This court has identified five prerequisites as “generally required” before a court may invoke the doctrine of judicial estoppel. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
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.