9 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1993–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
In Re Marriage of Dietergreen1 sentence2021The purpose of the educational expense provision “is to authorize a discretionary award *** to guarantee that funds are available if the need arises.” In re Marriage of Dieter, 271 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Lawlor v. North American Corporation of Illinoisgreen1 sentence2021See Lawlor, 2012 IL 112530, ¶ 70 . ¶ 27 CONCLUSION ¶ 28 The circuit court did not err in denying David’s motion to modify parenting time. | 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 Marriage of Bogan
green
2 sentences2005Here, we must decide whether David's claim that Cheri held the property in trust for the benefit of the marital estate is a claim that is ancillary to the dissolution case. *681 In In re Marriage of Bogan, 116 Ill.2d 72 , 107 Ill.Dec. 188 , 506 N.E.2d 1243 (1986), our supreme court held that an order entered in the original dissolution proceedings, bifurcating the judgment, was appealable with a Rule 304(a) finding because the bifurcation of the judgment was not one of the ancillary issues involved in a dissolution case. 2005Here, we must decide whether David's claim that Cheri held the property in trust for the benefit of the marital estate is a claim that is ancillary to the dissolution case. *681 In In re Marriage of Bogan, 116 Ill.2d 72 , 107 Ill.Dec. 188 , 506 N.E.2d 1243 (1986), our supreme court held that an order entered in the original dissolution proceedings, bifurcating the judgment, was appealable with a Rule 304(a) finding because the bifurcation of the judgment was not one of the ancillary issues involved in a dissolution case. | 2 | 2005–2005 |
Arlene Atlas v. Mayer Hoffman McCann, P.C.
green
1 sentence2026“An issue not clearly defined and sufficiently presented fails to satisfy the requirements of Rule 341(h)(7) and is, therefore, forfeited.” Id. ¶ 90 David’s brief argues: “[The trial court] ignore[ed] evidence introduced by David that he in fact traced the source of funds for nearly every one of the ‘no source’ deposits identified in Exhibit 5 to Godbout’s report to one of his Separate Property accounts. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
In re Marriage of Hluska
green
1 sentence2021In re Marriage of Hluska, 2011 IL App (1st) 092636 , ¶ 57. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
In Re Marriage of Deem
green
1 sentence2012ANALYSIS ¶ 36 A. Downward Deviation From Guidelines ¶ 37 “Child support is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court, and this court will not disturb the trial court’s determination absent an abuse of discretion. [Citation.]” In re Marriage of Deem, 328 Ill. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Pasquale v. Speed Products Engineering
green
2 sentences1995According to the court, the plain language of the Contribution Act provides that the "consideration" paid by Great Lakes for the settlement reduced the recovery against F & B "on any claim against it." (Emphasis in original.) ( 252 Ill.App.3d at 733 , 191 Ill.Dec. 899 , 624 N.E.2d 1277 ; see Ill.Rev.Stat.1979, ch. 70, par. 302(c).) The court further reasoned that, although the case was necessarily presented to the jury as two separate and distinct actions against Speed because David's claim against F & B was barred, there existed, nonetheless, a single cause of action by Samantha and David aga 1995According to the court, the plain language of the Contribution Act provides that the "consideration" paid by Great Lakes for the settlement reduced the recovery against F & B "on any claim against it." (Emphasis in original.) ( 252 Ill.App.3d at 733 , 191 Ill.Dec. 899 , 624 N.E.2d 1277 ; see Ill.Rev.Stat.1979, ch. 70, par. 302(c).) The court further reasoned that, although the case was necessarily presented to the jury as two separate and distinct actions against Speed because David's claim against F & B was barred, there existed, nonetheless, a single cause of action by Samantha and David aga | 1 | 1995–1995 |
First Capitol Mortgage Corp. v. Talandis Construction Corp.
green
2 sentences1994Respondent, Margie Feher (formerly Cody) (Margie), did not file a brief in this matter, but since David’s brief and the record are sufficient to resolve this issue, we will consider this appeal pursuant to First Capitol Mortgage Corp. v. Talandis Construction Corp. (1976), 63 Ill. 2d 128 , 345 N.E.2d 493 . 1994Respondent, Margie Feher (formerly Cody) (Margie), did not file a brief in this matter, but since David’s brief and the record are sufficient to resolve this issue, we will consider this appeal pursuant to First Capitol Mortgage Corp. v. Talandis Construction Corp. (1976), 63 Ill. 2d 128 , 345 N.E.2d 493 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
In Re Marriage of Stanley
green
1 sentence1993David relies upon Lamp v. Lamp (1980), 81 Ill. 2d 364 , 410 N.E.2d 31 , In re Marriage of Stanley (1985), 133 Ill. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Lamp v. Lamp
green
2 sentences1993David relies upon Lamp v. Lamp (1980), 81 Ill. 2d 364 , 410 N.E.2d 31 , In re Marriage of Stanley (1985), 133 Ill. 1993David relies upon Lamp v. Lamp (1980), 81 Ill. 2d 364 , 410 N.E.2d 31 , In re Marriage of Stanley (1985), 133 Ill. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
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.
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.