10 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 1986–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Morris v. Floresgreen2 sentences2010Morris v. Flores, 174 Ill. 2010Morris v. Flores, 174 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
Woods v. Colegreen2 sentences2000App. 3d 737, 749 (1992)), and our review is de novo (Woods v. Cole, 181 Ill. 2d 512, 516 (1998)). 2000App. 3d 737, 749 (1992)), and our review is de novo ( Woods v. Cole , 181 Ill. 2d 512, 516 (1998)). | 2 | 2 |
Grossinger Motorcorp, Inc. v. American National Bank & Trust Co.green2 sentences2000Whether a contractual provision is a valid liquidated damages clause or a penalty clause is a question of law (Grossinger Mortorcorp, Inc. v. American National Bank & Trust Co., 240 Ill. 2000Whether a contractual provision is a valid liquidated damages clause or a penalty clause is a question of law ( Grossinger Mortorcorp, Inc. v. American National Bank & Trust Co. , 240 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
Jameson Realty Group v. Kostinergreen1 sentence2024“It is a general rule of contract law that, for reasons of public policy, a liquidated damages clause which operates as a penalty for nonperformance or as a threat to secure performance will not be enforced.” Jameson Realty Group v. Kostiner, 351 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Med+ Plus Neck & Back Pain Center v. Noffsingergreen1 sentence2021Med+Plus Neck and Back Pain Center, S.C. v. Noffsinger, 311 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
H&M Driver Leasing Services, Unlimited, Inc. v. Champion International Corp.green1 sentence2021See H & M Driver Leasing Services, Unlimited, Inc. v. Champion International Corp., 181 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wise v. United States
green
2 sentences2014In finding a valid liquidated damages clause, the Seventh Circuit relied on Wise v. United States, 249 U.S. 361 (1919), which found that courts "'look with candor, if not with favor, upon such provisions in contracts when deliberately entered into between parties who have equality of opportunity for understanding and insisting upon their rights, as promoting prompt performance of contracts and because adjusting in advance, and amicably, matters the settlement of which through courts would often involve difficulty, uncertainty, delay and expense.'" Bethlehem Steel, 350 F.2d at 651 (quoting Wise 2014In finding a valid liquidated damages clause, the Seventh Circuit relied on Wise v. United States, 249 U.S. 361 (1919), which found that courts "'look with candor, if not with favor, upon such provisions in contracts when deliberately entered into between parties who have equality of opportunity for understanding and insisting upon their rights, as promoting prompt performance of contracts and because adjusting in advance, and amicably, matters the settlement of which through courts would often involve difficulty, uncertainty, delay and expense.'" Bethlehem Steel, 350 F.2d at 651 (quoting Wise | 2 | 2014–2014 |
Bethlehem Steel Corporation v. City of Chicago
green
2 sentences2014In finding a valid liquidated damages clause, the Seventh Circuit relied on Wise v. United States, 249 U.S. 361 (1919), which found that courts "'look with candor, if not with favor, upon such provisions in contracts when deliberately entered into between parties who have equality of opportunity for understanding and insisting upon their rights, as promoting prompt performance of contracts and because adjusting in advance, and amicably, matters the settlement of which through courts would often involve difficulty, uncertainty, delay and expense.'" Bethlehem Steel, 350 F.2d at 651 (quoting Wise 2014In finding a valid liquidated damages clause, the Seventh Circuit relied on Wise v. United States, 249 U.S. 361 (1919), which found that courts “ ‘look with candor, if not with favor, upon such provisions in contracts when deliberately entered into between parties who have equality of opportunity for understanding and insisting upon their rights, as promoting prompt performance of contracts and because adjusting in advance, and amicably, matters the settlement of which through courts would often involve difficulty, uncertainty, delay and expense.’ ” Bethlehem Steel, 350 F.2d at 651 (quoting Wi | 2 | 2014–2014 |
Lefemine v. Baron
green
1 sentence1992Because neither party intends the stipulated sum to be the agreed-upon measure of damages, the provision cannot be a valid liquidated damages clause.” Lefemine, 573 So. 2d at 329-30 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Kurtzon v. Kurtzon
green
2 sentences1986We do not believe that the legislative purpose of stabilizing business (Kurtzon v. Kurtzon (1950), 339 Ill. 1986We do not believe that the legislative purpose of stabilizing business ( Kurtzon v. Kurtzon (1950), 339 Ill. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
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.