8 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 1967–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
People v. Williamsgreen1 sentence2025See Williams, 204 Ill. 2d at 207 (“If the initial and subsequent charges filed against the defendant are subject to compulsory joinder, delays attributable to the defendant on the initial charges are not attributable to the defendant on the subsequent charges.”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sudzus v. Department of Employment Security
green
2 sentences2018"At the time and place fixed in the notice, the Board shall conduct [a] hearing of the charges, providing both the accused person and the complainant ample opportunity to present in person or by counsel such statements, testimony, evidence, and argument as may be pertinent to the charges or to a defense thereto." Id. § 15-15(c). 2018“If the licensee *** fails to file an answer after service of notice, *** her license may, at the discretion of the Department, be suspended, revoked, or placed on probationary status and the Department may take whatever disciplinary action it deems proper, including limiting the scope, nature, or extent of the person’s practice, without a hearing.” Id. -8- “At the time and place fixed in the notice, the Board shall conduct [a] hearing of the charges, providing both the accused person and the complainant ample opportunity to present in person or by counsel such statements, testimony, evidence, | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Center Partners, Ltd. v. Growth Head GP, LLC
green
1 sentence2023Id. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Dryer
green
1 sentence2021At that time, the State also indicated that it would “follow up with a written offer based on the new counts” and once again asked to postpone - 13 - 2021 IL App (2d) 190187 defendant’s motion to dismiss so that the parties could conduct a Rule 402 conference (see Ill. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Romanik v. Board of Fire & Police Commissioners
green
2 sentences1995Thus, under Romanik, a probationary fireman or policeman may be fired by the appropriate board of fire or police commissioners without notice of the charges or a hearing. 61 Ill. 2d at 425 , 338 N.E.2d at 399 . 1995Thus, under Romanik, a probationary fireman or policeman may be fired by the appropriate board of fire or police commissioners without notice of the charges or a hearing. 61 Ill. 2d at 425 , 338 N.E.2d at 399 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Kropel v. Conlisk
green
2 sentences1980Citing Kropel v. Conlisk (1975), 60 Ill. 2d 17 , 322 N.E.2d 793 , and Palcek v. City of Chicago Heights (1979), 74 Ill. 1980Citing Kropel v. Conlisk (1975), 60 Ill. 2d 17 , 322 N.E.2d 793 , and Palcek v. City of Chicago Heights (1979), 74 Ill. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Palcek v. City of Chicago Heights
green
1 sentence1980Citing Kropel v. Conlisk (1975), 60 Ill. 2d 17 , 322 N.E.2d 793 , and Palcek v. City of Chicago Heights (1979), 74 Ill. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Larson v. Commonwealth Edison Co.
green
1 sentence1967In Miller v. DeWitt, 37 Ill2d 273, 226 NE2d 630 , the liability of the architects, and in Larson v. Commonwealth Edison Co., 33 Ill2d 316, 211 NE2d 247 , the charges of violation of the Structural Work Act on the part of the defendant engineers, were based upon the fact that they exercised control which placed them, along with others, in charge of the work and imposed upon them liability under the Structural Work Act. | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Miller v. DeWitt
green
1 sentence1967In Miller v. DeWitt, 37 Ill2d 273, 226 NE2d 630 , the liability of the architects, and in Larson v. Commonwealth Edison Co., 33 Ill2d 316, 211 NE2d 247 , the charges of violation of the Structural Work Act on the part of the defendant engineers, were based upon the fact that they exercised control which placed them, along with others, in charge of the work and imposed upon them liability under the Structural Work Act. | 1 | 1967–1967 |
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.