9 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1993–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Weidner v. Midcon Corp.green1 sentence2025“The purpose of a motion for reconsideration is to inform the trial court of (1) newly discovered evidence previously unavailable at the time of the original hearing, (2) changes that have occurred in the law since the original hearing, or (3) errors in the court’s earlier application of the law.” Weidner v. Midcon Corp., 328 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Marriage of Schneidergreen1 sentence2023As this court has made clear, “qualifying for the deduction still requires the claimant to convince the circuit court” that the requested deduction “is an appropriate and reasonable business expense that is required to carry on the trade or business.” Hochstatter, 2020 IL App (3d) 190132, ¶ 25 . ¶ 25 Regarding Craig’s challenge to the amount of maintenance awarded, reviewing courts in Illinois have consistently explained, “the propriety of a maintenance award is within the discretion of the trial court and the court’s decision will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.” In re Marriag | 1 | 1 |
People v. Hallgreen1 sentence2023An abuse of discretion occurs only “when ‘the trial court’s ruling is arbitrary, fanciful, unreasonable, or where no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the trial court.’ ” Blum v. Koster, 235 Ill. 2d 21, 36 (2009) (quoting People v. Hall, 195 Ill. 2d 1, 20 (2000)). ¶ 26 When a party challenges the court’s factual findings regarding maintenance, including determinations of the parties’ income, such findings are set aside only if they are against the manifest weight of the evidence. | 1 | 1 |
Blum v. Kostergreen1 sentence2023An abuse of discretion occurs only “when ‘the trial court’s ruling is arbitrary, fanciful, unreasonable, or where no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the trial court.’ ” Blum v. Koster, 235 Ill. 2d 21, 36 (2009) (quoting People v. Hall, 195 Ill. 2d 1, 20 (2000)). ¶ 26 When a party challenges the court’s factual findings regarding maintenance, including determinations of the parties’ income, such findings are set aside only if they are against the manifest weight of the evidence. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Marriage of Baumgartnergreen1 sentence2014See Baumgartner I, 384 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Wilsongreen2 sentences2013In light of the fact that Morrow follows the guidance from the supreme court in People v. Wilson, 66 Ill. 2d 346, 349 (1977) (‘whether accomplice testimony, corroborated or uncorroborated, is a satisfactory basis for conviction goes to the weight of the evidence and is, therefore, in the province of the jury or the court’), and that the supreme court denied the appeals [in Curtis and Morrow] [citations], we follow that analysis.” Id. at 440 . ¶ 31 We, too, adopt the Craig analysis. 2013In light of the fact that Morrow follows the guidance from the supreme court in People v. Wilson, 66 Ill. 2d 346, 349 (1977) (‘whether accomplice testimony, corroborated or uncorroborated, is a satisfactory basis for conviction goes to the weight of the evidence and is, therefore, in the province of the jury or the court’), and that the supreme court denied the appeals [in Curtis and Morrow] [citations], we follow that analysis.” Id. at 440 . ¶ 31 We, too, adopt the Craig analysis. | 1 | 1 |
Pullen v. Mulligangreen2 sentences1995A court will consider the initialling requirement to be merely directory and allow the counting of uninitialled absentee ballots only if: "(1) the absentee ballots can be identified and distinguished from in-precinct ballots; and (2) the initialling requirement does not contribute to the integrity of the election process.” (Pullen, 138 Ill. 2d at 52 .) The parties may offer trial testimony and other evidence on the issue of whether the Craig exception has been met. 1995A court will consider the initialling requirement to be merely directory and allow the counting of uninitialled absentee ballots only if: "(1) the absentee ballots can be identified and distinguished from in-precinct ballots; and (2) the initialling requirement does not contribute to the integrity of the election process.” (Pullen, 138 Ill. 2d at 52 .) The parties may offer trial testimony and other evidence on the issue of whether the Craig exception has been met. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re County Treasurer
green
2 sentences2009In re County -11- No. 2--07--0620 Treasurer, 356 Ill. 2009In re County Treasurer, 356 Ill.App.3d at 1104-06 , 292 Ill.Dec. 997 , 827 N.E.2d 526 . | 2 | 2009–2009 |
Craig v. Peterson
green
2 sentences1994Allowing qualified absentee voters to be disenfranchised under the facts of this case would damage rather than enhance the integrity of the election process. " 'Elections are equal when the vote of each voter is equal in its influence upon the result to the vote of every other elector — where each ballot is as effective as every other ballot.’ ” (Craig, 39 Ill. 2d at 195 , quoting Moran v. Bowley (1932), 347 Ill. 148, 162-63 .) The second prong of the Craig exception has been met. 1994Allowing qualified absentee voters to be disenfranchised under the facts of this case would damage rather than enhance the integrity of the election process. " 'Elections are equal when the vote of each voter is equal in its influence upon the result to the vote of every other elector — where each ballot is as effective as every other ballot.’ ” (Craig, 39 Ill. 2d at 195 , quoting Moran v. Bowley (1932), 347 Ill. 148, 162-63 .) The second prong of the Craig exception has been met. | 2 | 1993–1994 |
In re Marriage of Hochstatter
green
1 sentence2023As this court has made clear, “qualifying for the deduction still requires the claimant to convince the circuit court” that the requested deduction “is an appropriate and reasonable business expense that is required to carry on the trade or business.” Hochstatter, 2020 IL App (3d) 190132, ¶ 25 . ¶ 25 Regarding Craig’s challenge to the amount of maintenance awarded, reviewing courts in Illinois have consistently explained, “the propriety of a maintenance award is within the discretion of the trial court and the court’s decision will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.” In re Marriag | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Marino
neutral
1 sentence2009We reversed the order granting summary judgment to Craig and remanded the cause for further proceedings ( Heiden v. Ottinger, No. 2-02-1331, 342 Ill.App.3d 1111 , 305 Ill.Dec. 387 , 855 N.E.2d 278 (2003) (unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23)), finding, in part, that the 1987 blood test raised a material issue of fact regarding the reliability of the 2001 blood test. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Heiden v. Ottinger
neutral
2 sentences2009We reversed the order granting summary judgment to Craig and remanded the cause for further proceedings ( Heiden v. Ottinger, No. 2-02-1331, 342 Ill.App.3d 1111 , 305 Ill.Dec. 387 , 855 N.E.2d 278 (2003) (unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23)), finding, in part, that the 1987 blood test raised a material issue of fact regarding the reliability of the 2001 blood test. 2009We reversed the order granting summary judgment to Craig and remanded the cause for further proceedings ( Heiden v. Ottinger, No. 2-02-1331, 342 Ill.App.3d 1111 , 305 Ill.Dec. 387 , 855 N.E.2d 278 (2003) (unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23)), finding, in part, that the 1987 blood test raised a material issue of fact regarding the reliability of the 2001 blood test. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Goble v. Board of Education of Iuka Community Consolidated School District No. 7
neutral
2 sentences1995See Pullen, 138 Ill. 2d at 53 ; Goble v. Board of Education of Iuka Community Consolidated School District No. 7 (1980), 83 Ill. 1995See Pullen, 138 Ill. 2d at 53 ; Goble v. Board of Education of Iuka Community Consolidated School District No. 7 (1980), 83 Ill. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Bazydlo v. Volant
green
2 sentences1995The court reasoned that "a clear and convincing standard adequately balances the conflicting interests in preserving the integrity of the election and avoiding unnecessary disenfranchisement of qualified absentee voters.” 264 Ill. 1995The court reasoned that "a clear and convincing standard adequately balances the conflicting interests in preserving the integrity of the election and avoiding unnecessary disenfranchisement of qualified absentee voters.” 264 Ill. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
McDunn v. Williams
green
2 sentences1994Instead, he claims that when absentee and in-precinct ballots are facially indistinguishable, the Craig exception should not be permitted, citing McDunn v. Williams (1993), 156 Ill. 2d 288 , 620 N.E.2d 385 , and Morandi v. Heiman (1961), 23 Ill. 2d 365 , 178 N.E.2d 314 . 1994Instead, he claims that when absentee and in-precinct ballots are facially indistinguishable, the Craig exception should not be permitted, citing McDunn v. Williams (1993), 156 Ill. 2d 288 , 620 N.E.2d 385 , and Morandi v. Heiman (1961), 23 Ill. 2d 365 , 178 N.E.2d 314 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Moran v. Bowley
green
2 sentences1994Allowing qualified absentee voters to be disenfranchised under the facts of this case would damage rather than enhance the integrity of the election process. " 'Elections are equal when the vote of each voter is equal in its influence upon the result to the vote of every other elector — where each ballot is as effective as every other ballot.’ ” (Craig, 39 Ill. 2d at 195 , quoting Moran v. Bowley (1932), 347 Ill. 148, 162-63 .) The second prong of the Craig exception has been met. 1994Allowing qualified absentee voters to be disenfranchised under the facts of this case would damage rather than enhance the integrity of the election process. " 'Elections are equal when the vote of each voter is equal in its influence upon the result to the vote of every other elector — where each ballot is as effective as every other ballot.’ ” (Craig, 39 Ill. 2d at 195 , quoting Moran v. Bowley (1932), 347 Ill. 148, 162-63 .) The second prong of the Craig exception has been met. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Morandi v. Heiman
green
2 sentences1994Instead, he claims that when absentee and in-precinct ballots are facially indistinguishable, the Craig exception should not be permitted, citing McDunn v. Williams (1993), 156 Ill. 2d 288 , 620 N.E.2d 385 , and Morandi v. Heiman (1961), 23 Ill. 2d 365 , 178 N.E.2d 314 . 1994Instead, he claims that when absentee and in-precinct ballots are facially indistinguishable, the Craig exception should not be permitted, citing McDunn v. Williams (1993), 156 Ill. 2d 288 , 620 N.E.2d 385 , and Morandi v. Heiman (1961), 23 Ill. 2d 365 , 178 N.E.2d 314 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.