Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 2010–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Lazenby v. Mark's Construction, Inc.green2 sentences2024Id. at 102 . 2016Lazenby v. Mark’s Construction, Inc., 236 Ill. 2d 83, 102 (2010); see also Strino v. Premier Healthcare Associates, P.C., 365 Ill. | 2 | 3 |
Strino v. Premier Healthcare Associatesgreen2 sentences2016Lazenby v. Mark’s Construction, Inc., 236 Ill. 2d 83, 102 (2010); see also Strino v. Premier Healthcare Associates, P.C., 365 Ill. 2015Lazenby v. Mark's Construction, Inc., 236 Ill. 2d 83, 102 (2010); see also Strino v. Premier Healthcare Associates, P.C., 365 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
Dillon v. Evanston Hospitalgreen2 sentences2010See Dillon, 199 Ill. 2d at 492 ; Guy, 239 Ill. 2010See Dillon, 199 Ill. 2d at 492 ; Guy, 239 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
Wiedenbeck v. Searlegreen1 sentence2020Under this rule, “we must presume that the jury found against plaintiff on every issue raised in the counts that were before it.” Id. ¶ 162 To prove negligence, plaintiff must prove (1) the standard of care against which the medical professional’s conduct must be measured, (2) negligent failure to comply with that standard, and (3) negligence proximately caused the injuries for which the plaintiff seeks redress. 49 Wiedenbeck v. Searle, 385 Ill. App. 3d 289, 292 (2008). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Obermeier v. Northwestern Memorial Hospital
green
2 sentences2021Obermeier, 2019 IL App (1st) 170553, ¶ 51 . ¶ 121 “Moreover, when multiple defenses are raised, a general verdict rendered by a jury creates a presumption that the jury found in favor of the winning party on every defense raised.” Great American Insurance Co. of New York v. Heneghan Wrecking & Excavating Co., 2015 IL App (1st) 133376, ¶ 15 , 46 N.E.3d 859 . 2021Obermeier, 2019 IL App (1st) 170553, ¶ 51 . ¶ 121 “Moreover, when multiple defenses are raised, a general verdict rendered by a jury creates a presumption that the jury found in favor of the winning party on every defense raised.” Great American Insurance Co. of New York v. Heneghan Wrecking & Excavating Co., 2015 IL App (1st) 133376, ¶ 15 , 46 N.E.3d 859 . | 3 | 2020–2021 |
Great American Insurance Co. v. Heneghan Wrecking & Excavating Co.
green
2 sentences2021Obermeier, 2019 IL App (1st) 170553, ¶ 51 . ¶ 121 “Moreover, when multiple defenses are raised, a general verdict rendered by a jury creates a presumption that the jury found in favor of the winning party on every defense raised.” Great American Insurance Co. of New York v. Heneghan Wrecking & Excavating Co., 2015 IL App (1st) 133376, ¶ 15 , 46 N.E.3d 859 . 2021Obermeier, 2019 IL App (1st) 170553, ¶ 51 . ¶ 121 “Moreover, when multiple defenses are raised, a general verdict rendered by a jury creates a presumption that the jury found in favor of the winning party on every defense raised.” Great American Insurance Co. of New York v. Heneghan Wrecking & Excavating Co., 2015 IL App (1st) 133376, ¶ 15 , 46 N.E.3d 859 . | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Guy v. Steurer
green
2 sentences2010See Dillon, 199 Ill. 2d at 492 ; Guy, 239 Ill. 2010See Dillon, 199 Ill. 2d at 492 ; Guy, 239 Ill. | 2 | 2010–2010 |