propriety of the jury instruction (Illinois) · Go Syfert
← Illinois issues

propriety of the jury instruction in Illinois

8 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2019 0 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Witherell v. Weimergreen
ill · 1987 · cited in 2 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
2 sentences

2011Similarly our court has held that when "there is a general verdict and more than one theory is presented, the verdict will be upheld if there was sufficient evidence to sustain either theory, and the defendant, having failed to request special interrogatories, cannot complain." Witherell v. Weimer, 118 Ill.2d 321, 329 , 113 Ill.Dec. 259 , 515 N.E.2d 68 (1987). ¶ 48 In light of this authority, any problem regarding the propriety of the jury instruction on plaintiffs' professional negligence count is immaterial, as a matter of law, unless Sherman Hospital can establish that there was not suffici

2011Similarly our court has held that when "there is a general verdict and more than one theory is presented, the verdict will be upheld if there was sufficient evidence to sustain either theory, and the defendant, having failed to request special interrogatories, cannot complain." Witherell v. Weimer, 118 Ill.2d 321, 329 , 113 Ill.Dec. 259 , 515 N.E.2d 68 (1987). ¶ 48 In light of this authority, any problem regarding the propriety of the jury instruction on plaintiffs' professional negligence count is immaterial, as a matter of law, unless Sherman Hospital can establish that there was not suffici

12

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Ready v. United/Goedecke Services, Inc. green
ill · 2010
2 sentences

2019In any event, our supreme court specifically held in Ready, 238 Ill. 2d at 592 , that the trial court erred not only in excluding evidence of the nonparties’ negligence but in “refusing to give the second paragraph” of IPI Civil No. 12.04 to support that sole proximate cause theory. ¶ 46 We are not persuaded by the case law cited by plaintiff.

2018In any event, our supreme court specifically held in Ready , 238 Ill. 2d at 592 , 345 Ill.Dec. 574 , 939 N.E.2d 417 , that the trial court erred not only in excluding evidence of the nonparties' negligence but in "refusing to give the second paragraph" of IPI Civil No. 12.04 to support that sole proximate cause theory. ¶ 46 We are not persuaded by the case law cited by plaintiff.

22018–2019
People v. Burton green
illappct · 1990
2 sentences

2008Burton, 201 Ill.

2008Burton, 201 Ill.

22008–2008
Abruzzo v. City of Park Ridge green
illappct · 2014
1 sentence

2019Accordingly, defendant’s position at trial, which identified two causes of Joey’s death, does 8 The propriety of the jury instruction does not appear to have been at issue on appeal. - 28 - not satisfy any interpretation of a ‘sole proximate cause’ argument.” Abruzzo, 2013 IL App (1st) 122360, ¶ 61 . ¶ 131 The majority deals with these cases by simply announcing that they are wrong.

12019–2019
Leonardi v. Loyola University of Chicago green
ill · 1995
2 sentences

2018In light of these decisions, we do not see how we can accept plaintiff's argument, and the trial court's conclusion, that the sole proximate cause theory is inapplicable when a defendant claims that two different nonparties' negligence was the sole proximate cause of a plaintiff's injuries. ¶ 45 It is no distinction that Nolan never specifically discussed the propriety of the jury instruction that corresponds to the sole proximate cause theory, the second paragraph of IPI Civil No. 12.04 ; if there is sufficient evidence to support the sole proximate cause theory at trial, "the defendant is en

2018In light of these decisions, we do not see how we can accept plaintiff's argument, and the trial court's conclusion, that the sole proximate cause theory is inapplicable when a defendant claims that two different nonparties' negligence was the sole proximate cause of a plaintiff's injuries. ¶ 45 It is no distinction that Nolan never specifically discussed the propriety of the jury instruction that corresponds to the sole proximate cause theory, the second paragraph of IPI Civil No. 12.04 ; if there is sufficient evidence to support the sole proximate cause theory at trial, "the defendant is en

12018–2018
Kus v. Sherman Hospital green
illappct · 1995
1 sentence

1996We reasoned that "[p]ermitting a jury to assume a judicial role in determining whether a duty existed, especially where we determine that a duty did exist as a matter of law, deprives the plaintiff of a fair trial." 268 Ill.

11996–1996
People v. Harris green
ill · 1978
2 sentences

1979The contested instruction defined murder as an act performed with the intent “ ‘to kill or do great bodily harm.’ ” In People v. Harris (1978), 72 Ill. 2d 16, 27 , 377 N.E.2d 28 , that instruction was held erroneous in that it permitted the jury to find a defendant guilty if he acted only with intent to do great bodily harm rather than with intent to cause death.

1979The contested instruction defined murder as an act performed with the intent “ ‘to kill or do great bodily harm.’ ” In People v. Harris (1978), 72 Ill. 2d 16, 27 , 377 N.E.2d 28 , that instruction was held erroneous in that it permitted the jury to find a defendant guilty if he acted only with intent to do great bodily harm rather than with intent to cause death.

11979–1979

Where else courts name it

PA 10 (1986–2025) IL 8 (1979–2019) MD 3 (2015–2024) TN 3 (1987–2024) MI 2 (2017–2017) AL 2 (1990–2006) CA 2 (1968–1985)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check