factual findings hearing (Illinois) · Go Syfert
← Illinois issues

factual findings hearing in Illinois

10 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2025 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.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Scott v. Department of Commerce & Community Affairsgreen
ill · 1981 · cited in 3 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2016–2017
2 sentences

2017Moreover, board members comprising the agency decision maker are assumed to be people “ ‘of conscience and intellectual discipline, capable of judging a particular controversy fairly on the basis of its own circumstances.’ ” Abrahamson, 153 Ill. 2d at 95 (quoting Scott v. Department of Commerce & Community Affairs, 84 Ill. 2d 42, 55 (1981)). ¶ 63 Thus, we will review the Board’s supplemental factual findings, as well as the factual findings of the hearing officer that were incorporated unmodified into the Board’s decision, to determine whether those findings were against the manifest weight of

2016Moreover, board members comprising the agency decision maker are assumed to be people “ ‘of conscience and intellectual discipline, capable of judging a particular controversy fairly on the basis of its own circumstances.’ ” Abrahamson, 153 Ill. 2d at 95 (quoting Scott v. Department of Commerce & Community Affairs, 84 Ill. 2d 42, 55 (1981)). ¶ 63 Thus, we will review the Board’s supplemental factual findings, as well as the factual findings of the hearing officer that were incorporated unmodified into the Board’s decision, to determine whether those findings were against the manifest - 22 - we

33
Golab v. Department of Employment Securitygreen
illappct · 1996 · cited in 2 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
2 sentences

1997Abrahamson , 153 Ill. 2d at 88 ; Golab v. Department of Employment Security , 281 Ill.

1997Abrahamson, 153 Ill. 2d at 88 ; Golab v. Department of Employment Security, 281 Ill.

22
BD. OF EDUC. OF ROUND LAKE AREA SCHOOLS v. State Bd. of Educ.green
illappct · 1997 · cited in 1 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012We need not address the remaining issues. ¶ 11 A. Section 24A-5 and Strict Compliance ¶ 12 On review, “we are limited to ascertaining whether the factual findings of the hearing officer are against the manifest weight of the evidence.” Board of Education v. State Board of Education, 292 Ill.

2012App. 3d 101, 109 , 685 N.E.2d 412, 417 (1997).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Abrahamson v. Illinois Department of Professional Regulation green
ill · 1992
2 sentences

2017Moreover, board members comprising the agency decision maker are assumed to be people “ ‘of conscience and intellectual discipline, capable of judging a particular controversy fairly on the basis of its own circumstances.’ ” Abrahamson, 153 Ill. 2d at 95 (quoting Scott v. Department of Commerce & Community Affairs, 84 Ill. 2d 42, 55 (1981)). ¶ 63 Thus, we will review the Board’s supplemental factual findings, as well as the factual findings of the hearing officer that were incorporated unmodified into the Board’s decision, to determine whether those findings were against the manifest weight of

2016Moreover, board members comprising the agency decision maker are assumed to be people “ ‘of conscience and intellectual discipline, capable of judging a particular controversy fairly on the basis of its own circumstances.’ ” Abrahamson, 153 Ill. 2d at 95 (quoting Scott v. Department of Commerce & Community Affairs, 84 Ill. 2d 42, 55 (1981)). ¶ 63 Thus, we will review the Board’s supplemental factual findings, as well as the factual findings of the hearing officer that were incorporated unmodified into the Board’s decision, to determine whether those findings were against the manifest - 22 - we

51997–2017
Beggs v. The Board of Education of Murphysboro Community Unit School District No. 186 green
ill · 2016
2 sentences

2025Using the standard of review set forth in Beggs v. Board of Education of Murphysboro Community Unit School District No. 186, 2016 IL 120236 , we agree. ¶ 39 In considering Bulow’s appeal, we must review the Board’s factual findings, as well as the factual findings of the hearing officer that were incorporated into the Board’s decision, to determine first whether those findings are against the manifest weight of the evidence.

2022First, “we will review the Board’s supplemental factual findings, as well as the factual findings of the hearing officer that were incorporated unmodified into the Board’s decision, to determine whether those findings were against the manifest weight of the evidence.” Id.

22022–2025
In Re Harris green
ill · 1982
1 sentence

1989(In re Harris (1982), 93 Ill. 2d 285, 295 .) Accordingly, the factual findings of the hearing panel are accorded deference.

11989–1989
In Re Ushijima green
ill · 1987
1 sentence

1989(In re Ushijima (1987), 119 Ill. 2d 51, 56-57 .) Our review of the record in this case satisfies us that the findings of fact made by the hearing panel are supported by clear and convincing evidence.

11989–1989
In Re Wigoda green
ill · 1979
1 sentence

1989(See, e.g., In re Anglin (1988), 122 Ill. 2d 531, 538 ; In re Wigoda (1979), 77 Ill. 2d 154, 158-59 .) The hearing panel’s finding on the Jones matter is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence and we see no reason to disturb that finding.

11989–1989
In Re Anglin green
ill · 1988
1 sentence

1989(See, e.g., In re Anglin (1988), 122 Ill. 2d 531, 538 ; In re Wigoda (1979), 77 Ill. 2d 154, 158-59 .) The hearing panel’s finding on the Jones matter is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence and we see no reason to disturb that finding.

11989–1989

Statutes the citing opinions construe

IL § 105 ILCS 5/24-12 (5) IL § 105 ILCS 5/24-16 (5) IL § 105 ILCS 5/34-85 (4) IL § 735 ILCS 5/3-102 (4) IL § 735 ILCS 5/3-110 (4) IL § 735 ILCS 5/2-619 (3) IL § 735 ILCS 5/3-101 (3) IL § 735 ILCS 5/3-105 (3) IL § 735 ILCS 5/3-107 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

LA 28 (1993–2014) NY 22 (1968–2026) MD 18 (1983–2015) DC 14 (1998–2024) CA 11 (1980–2023) IL 10 (1989–2025) FL 10 (1985–2015) VA 7 (2008–2022) OH 7 (1990–2022) RI 6 (2000–2026) PA 5 (1984–2015) CO 5 (1990–1999) CT 3 (2006–2025) AZ 2 (1998–2025) MI 2 (2014–2014) OR 2 (2025–2025) WA 2 (1998–1998) MN 2 (1984–2011) NM 2 (1989–2012)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check