first instance hearing in Illinois

1984The Illinois Supreme Court stated the applicable rule in People v. Cook (1965), 33 Ill. 2d 363, 369-70 , 211 N.E.2d 374 , 377: “[T]he admissibility of a confession which is challenged on the ground that it is involuntary is a matter for the trial judge to determine in the first instance by a hearing out of the presence of the jury. [Citation.] If the court rules that the confession is voluntary and the confession is admitted in evidence, the defendant still has the right to present evidence to the jury which affects the credibility or weight to be given the confession.” Under Cook, the trial c

1984The Illinois Supreme Court stated the applicable rule in People v. Cook (1965), 33 Ill. 2d 363, 369-70 , 211 N.E.2d 374 , 377: “[T]he admissibility of a confession which is challenged on the ground that it is involuntary is a matter for the trial judge to determine in the first instance by a hearing out of the presence of the jury. [Citation.] If the court rules that the confession is voluntary and the confession is admitted in evidence, the defendant still has the right to present evidence to the jury which affects the credibility or weight to be given the confession.” Under Cook, the trial c

1993Dec. at 320 , 387 N.E.2d at 1248 .) We see little difference between a punitive damages claim for willfully and wantonly hiring an employee in the first instance and a claim for willfully and wantonly retaining an unfit employee after hiring.

1993App. 3d at 931 , 387 N.E.2d at 1248 .) We see little difference between a punitive damages claim for willfully and wantonly hiring an employee in the first instance and a claim for willfully and wantonly retaining an unfit employee after hiring.

1972Co., 32 Ill.2d 446 , which held that the presumption of negligence raised by the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur does not simply vanish but remains to be considered with all of the other evidence in the case when contrary evidence is offered by the defendant.

1972Co., 32 Ill.2d 446 , which held that the presumption of negligence raised by the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur does not simply vanish but remains to be considered with all of the other evidence in the case when contrary evidence is offered by the defendant.

1970(Cf. People v. Banks, 26 Ill.2d 259 .) In this case there is such a paucity of evidence on this question that it is our opinion that the trial court was correct in refusing the tendered instruction.

1970(Cf. People v. Banks, 26 Ill.2d 259 .) In this case there is such a paucity of evidence on this question that it is our opinion that the trial court was correct in refusing the tendered instruction.

1965(People v. Kemp, 29 Ill.2d 321 .) If the court rules that the confession is voluntary and the confession is admitted in evidence, the defendant still has the right to present evidence to the jury which affects the credibility or weight to be given the confession.

1949Bollenbach v. Bloomenthal, 341 Ill. 539 .

1943Ellwood v. Walter, 103 Ill.

1938Where, the statute provides a remedy against excessive assessment or valuation of property the taxpayer must avail himself of this remedy and cannot resort to the courts in the first instance in defense of an action for collection of a delinquent tax.” A holding of like effect was made in People v. Oakridge Cemetery Corp. 328 Ill. 53 .

1925Cummins v. Webber, 218 Ill. 521 ; Hulberi v. People, 189 id. 114; Keokuk and Hamilton Bridge Co. v. People, supra; Camp v. Simpson, 118 Ill. 224 ; Adsit v. Lieb, 76 id. 198.

1925Cummins v. Webber, 218 Ill. 521 ; Hulberi v. People, 189 id. 114; Keokuk and Hamilton Bridge Co. v. People, supra; Camp v. Simpson, 118 Ill. 224 ; Adsit v. Lieb, 76 id. 198.

1925Cummins v. Webber, 218 Ill. 521 ; Hulberi v. People, 189 id. 114; Keokuk and Hamilton Bridge Co. v. People, supra; Camp v. Simpson, 118 Ill. 224 ; Adsit v. Lieb, 76 id. 198.