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 1 courts 1989–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Morianagreen2 sentences2026Accordingly, Morgan maintained that “a choice of law clause that has the effect of making the Act inapplicable is both a prohibited waiver or evasion of the Act and invalid as contrary to public policy.” Morgan cited the United States Supreme Court case of Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 596 U.S. 639, 653 (2022), for the statement that an “arbitration agreement *** does not alter or abridge substantive rights,” and contended that there was “no basis for disregarding controlling Illinois statutory law.” ¶9 The arbitrator heard oral argument on May 31, 2023, and entered an order granting 2025Accordingly, Morgan maintained that “a choice of law clause that has the effect of making the Act inapplicable is both a prohibited waiver or evasion of the Act and invalid as contrary to public policy.” Morgan cited the United States Supreme Court case of Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 596 U.S. 639, 653 (2022), for the statement that an “arbitration agreement *** does not alter or abridge substantive rights,” and contended that there was “no basis for disregarding controlling Illinois statutory law.” ¶9 The arbitrator heard oral argument on May 31, 2023, and entered an order granting | 3 | 3 |
Strickland v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2011Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). 2011Id. ¶ 39 "Generally, counsel's choice of an appropriate defense is a matter of trial strategy or tactics not reviewable under the Strickland test, unless that choice is based upon a misapprehension of the law. [Citations.] Misapprehension of a defense theory may be shown where evidence is presented in such a manner that the jury is left with no choice but to convict defendant of the offenses charged [citation] * * *." People v. Garmon, 394 Ill.App.3d *1190 977, 987, 334 Ill.Dec. 303 , 916 N.E.2d 1191 (2009). ¶ 40 Here, defense counsel's request for a jury instruction regarding the defense of c | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Gleckler
green
2 sentences2004Defendant acknowledges that the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Gleckler, 82 Ill. 2d 145 (1980), held that compulsion is a prohibited defense in first degree murder cases. 2004Defendant acknowledges that the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Gleckler , 82 Ill. 2d 145 (1980), held that compulsion is a prohibited defense in first degree murder cases. | 4 | 2004–2011 |
People v. Haynie
green
2 sentences2011People v. Gleckler, 82 Ill. 2d 145, 157 , 411 N.E.2d 845 (1980); People v. Haynie, 347 Ill. 2011People v. Gleckler, 82 Ill.2d 145, 157 , 44 Ill.Dec. 483 , 411 N.E.2d 849 (1980); People v. Haynie, 347 Ill.App.3d 650, 655 , 283 Ill.Dec. 146 , 807 N.E.2d 987 (2004); see 720 ILCS 5/7-11 (West 2002). ¶ 41 Notwithstanding, at the jury instruction conference, defense counsel argued that the compulsion defense should be available because defendant was charged under the accountability statute as opposed to solely under the murder statute. | 2 | 2011–2011 |
People v. Garmon
green
2 sentences2011App. 3d 977, 987 , 916 N.E.2d 1191 (2009). ¶ 40 Here, defense counsel’s request for a jury instruction regarding the defense of compulsion was denied because the law provides that compulsion is a prohibited defense in first degree murder cases. 2011Id. ¶ 39 "Generally, counsel's choice of an appropriate defense is a matter of trial strategy or tactics not reviewable under the Strickland test, unless that choice is based upon a misapprehension of the law. [Citations.] Misapprehension of a defense theory may be shown where evidence is presented in such a manner that the jury is left with no choice but to convict defendant of the offenses charged [citation] * * *." People v. Garmon, 394 Ill.App.3d *1190 977, 987, 334 Ill.Dec. 303 , 916 N.E.2d 1191 (2009). ¶ 40 Here, defense counsel's request for a jury instruction regarding the defense of c | 2 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Thomas
green
1 sentence2011People v. Gleckler, 82 Ill. 2d 145, 157 , 411 N.E.2d 845 (1980); People v. Haynie, 347 Ill. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
People v. Panus
green
2 sentences1989In People v. Panus (1979), 76 Ill. 2d 263 , 391 N.E.2d 376 , involving testimony of a prosecution witness which was not absolutely necessary for conviction, the supreme court held no error occurred when the trial court prohibited the defense from questioning the witness as to the number of charges he had pending against him. 1989In People v. Panus (1979), 76 Ill. 2d 263 , 391 N.E.2d 376 , involving testimony of a prosecution witness which was not absolutely necessary for conviction, the supreme court held no error occurred when the trial court prohibited the defense from questioning the witness as to the number of charges he had pending against him. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
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.