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.
11 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1899–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Sarkissian v. Chicago Board of Educationgreen2 sentences2017Castleberry, 2015 IL 116916, ¶ 15 . ¶ 21 We acknowledge previous cases that addressed the “inherent authority” of a court to render a particular judgment and had determined, “that the power to render the particular judgment or sentence is as important an element of jurisdiction as is personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.” See, e.g., Sarkissian v. Chicago Board of Education, 201 Ill. 2d 95, 103 (2002), Davis, 156 Ill. 2d at 156 , People v. Permanian, 381 Ill. 2017Castleberry, 2015 IL 116916, ¶ 15 . ¶ 21 We acknowledge previous cases that addressed the “inherent authority” of a court to render a particular judgment and had determined, “that the power to render the particular judgment or sentence is as important an element of jurisdiction as is personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.” See, e.g., Sarkissian v. Chicago Board of Education, 201 Ill. 2d 95, 103 (2002), -5- Davis, 156 Ill. 2d at 156 , People v. Permanian, 381 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Davisgreen2 sentences2025In re M.W., 232 Ill. 2d 408, 414-15 (2009) (citing People v. Davis, 156 Ill. 2d 149, 156 (1993)) (an order entered without subject matter or personal jurisdiction is void and may be attacked at any time, but an order entered in error by a court with jurisdiction is merely voidable and not subject to collateral attack). ¶ 23 Indeed, the Supreme Court has made clear that “the failure to comply with a statutory requirement or prerequisite does not negate the circuit court’s subject matter jurisdiction or constitute a nonwaivable condition precedent to the circuit court’s jurisdiction.” See LVNV F 2017Castleberry, 2015 IL 116916, ¶ 15 . ¶ 21 We acknowledge previous cases that addressed the “inherent authority” of a court to render a particular judgment and had determined, “that the power to render the particular judgment or sentence is as important an element of jurisdiction as is personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.” See, e.g., Sarkissian v. Chicago Board of Education, 201 Ill. 2d 95, 103 (2002), Davis, 156 Ill. 2d at 156 , People v. Permanian, 381 Ill. | 1 | 5 |
People v. Permaniangreen2 sentences2017Castleberry, 2015 IL 116916, ¶ 15 . ¶ 21 We acknowledge previous cases that addressed the “inherent authority” of a court to render a particular judgment and had determined, “that the power to render the particular judgment or sentence is as important an element of jurisdiction as is personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.” See, e.g., Sarkissian v. Chicago Board of Education, 201 Ill. 2d 95, 103 (2002), Davis, 156 Ill. 2d at 156 , People v. Permanian, 381 Ill. 2017Castleberry, 2015 IL 116916, ¶ 15 . ¶ 21 We acknowledge previous cases that addressed the “inherent authority” of a court to render a particular judgment and had determined, “that the power to render the particular judgment or sentence is as important an element of jurisdiction as is personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.” See, e.g., Sarkissian v. Chicago Board of Education, 201 Ill. 2d 95, 103 (2002), -5- Davis, 156 Ill. 2d at 156 , People v. Permanian, 381 Ill. | 1 | 2 |
In Re GFHgreen1 sentence2025In re M.W., 232 Ill. 2d 408, 414-15 (2009) (citing People v. Davis, 156 Ill. 2d 149, 156 (1993)) (an order entered without subject matter or personal jurisdiction is void and may be attacked at any time, but an order entered in error by a court with jurisdiction is merely voidable and not subject to collateral attack). ¶ 23 Indeed, the Supreme Court has made clear that “the failure to comply with a statutory requirement or prerequisite does not negate the circuit court’s subject matter jurisdiction or constitute a nonwaivable condition precedent to the circuit court’s jurisdiction.” See LVNV F | 1 | 1 |
In Re MWgreen1 sentence2025In re M.W., 232 Ill. 2d 408, 414-15 (2009) (citing People v. Davis, 156 Ill. 2d 149, 156 (1993)) (an order entered without subject matter or personal jurisdiction is void and may be attacked at any time, but an order entered in error by a court with jurisdiction is merely voidable and not subject to collateral attack). ¶ 23 Indeed, the Supreme Court has made clear that “the failure to comply with a statutory requirement or prerequisite does not negate the circuit court’s subject matter jurisdiction or constitute a nonwaivable condition precedent to the circuit court’s jurisdiction.” See LVNV F | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
LVNV Funding, LLC v. Trice
green
2 sentences2025In re M.W., 232 Ill. 2d 408, 414-15 (2009) (citing People v. Davis, 156 Ill. 2d 149, 156 (1993)) (an order entered without subject matter or personal jurisdiction is void and may be attacked at any time, but an order entered in error by a court with jurisdiction is merely voidable and not subject to collateral attack). ¶ 23 Indeed, the Supreme Court has made clear that “the failure to comply with a statutory requirement or prerequisite does not negate the circuit court’s subject matter jurisdiction or constitute a nonwaivable condition precedent to the circuit court’s jurisdiction.” See LVNV F 2021Id. ¶ 34 Further, an erroneous order of a court must be obeyed until it is properly vacated. | 2 | 2021–2025 |
People v. Castleberry
green
2 sentences2017Castleberry, 2015 IL 116916, ¶ 15 . ¶ 21 We acknowledge previous cases that addressed the “inherent authority” of a court to render a particular judgment and had determined, “that the power to render the particular judgment or sentence is as important an element of jurisdiction as is personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.” See, e.g., Sarkissian v. Chicago Board of Education, 201 Ill. 2d 95, 103 (2002), Davis, 156 Ill. 2d at 156 , People v. Permanian, 381 Ill. 2017Castleberry, 2015 IL 116916, ¶ 15 . ¶ 21 We acknowledge previous cases that addressed the “inherent authority” of a court to render a particular judgment and had determined, “that the power to render the particular judgment or sentence is as important an element of jurisdiction as is personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.” See, e.g., Sarkissian v. Chicago Board of Education, 201 Ill. 2d 95, 103 (2002), -5- Davis, 156 Ill. 2d at 156 , People v. Permanian, 381 Ill. | 2 | 2017–2017 |
The Village of Lake in the Hills v. Niklaus
green
2 sentences2014Since section 1-2.1-8(b) of the Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/1-2.1-8(b) (West 2012)) instructs that an order of a hearing officer of a home-rule municipality may be enforced in the “same manner” as a judgment entered by a court of competent - 12 - 2014 IL App (2d) 130654 jurisdiction, we conclude that the hearing officer’s order is to be treated as the equivalent of a judgment rendered in the circuit court of the county in which the municipality is located. 2014Since section 1-2.1-8(b) of the Municipal Code (65 ILCS - 12 - 2014 IL App (2d) 130654 5/1-2.1-8(b) (West 2012)) instructs that an order of a hearing officer of a home-rule municipality may be enforced in the “same manner” as a judgment entered by a court of competent jurisdiction, we conclude that the hearing officer’s order is to be treated as the equivalent of a judgment rendered in the circuit court of the county in which the municipality is located. | 2 | 2014–2014 |
In Re DLW
green
2 sentences1991(D.L.W., 187 Ill. 1991The court held that this fact required reversal of the order entered at that hearing which revoked the minor's probation and committed him to the Department of Corrections. ( D.L.W., 187 Ill.App.3d at 570-72 , 135 Ill. | 2 | 1991–1991 |
People v. D.L.W.
neutral
1 sentence1991The court held that this fact required reversal of the order entered at that hearing which revoked the minor's probation and committed him to the Department of Corrections. ( D.L.W., 187 Ill.App.3d at 570-72 , 135 Ill. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Wells v. Hicks
neutral
1 sentence1899(See Wells v. Hicks, 27 Ill. 343 ; Frizzell v. Rogers, 82 id. 109.) We are clearly of opinion the record shows that the highway commissioners had jurisdiction.” The rule to be deduced from what was said by Mr. Cooley in his work on Taxation, (8th ed. p. 465,) and by Mr. Dillon in Ms work on Municipal Corporations, (4th ed. p. 800,) is, that when the assent or petition of a designated number of persons is necessary to the jurisdiction of the city council or the proper authorities to take official action, the finding of the council or body that the requisite number of persons had assented or pet | 1 | 1899–1899 |
Board of Supervisors v. Magoon
neutral
1 sentence1899In Board of Supervisors v. Magoon, 109 Ill. 142 , in disposing of the objection it was not proven the commissioners had posted the notices required by statute to authorize them to act, we said: “The commissioners recite, in the order entered at the hearing, that they met at the time and place named in the notice, and that is evidence that notice was given. | 1 | 1899–1899 |
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.