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 1983–2013 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Senn Park Nursing Center v. Millergreen2 sentences2013None of these cases suggested that the exclusionary language in section 19(f)(1) stood as a barrier to the circuit or appellate court's jurisdiction.3 3 This is significant, because a reviewing court has an independent obligation to 5 2013 IL App (1st) 120549WC ¶ 15 Moreover, "the determination of whether a suit is brought against the State and thus barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity does not depend on the identity of the formal parties, but rather on the issue raised and the relief sought." Senn Park Nursing Center v. Miller, 104 Ill. 2d 169, 186 (1984) (internal quotation marks omi 2011App. 3d 235, 237 , 491 N.E.2d 830, 832 (1986) (affirming the trial court’s order striking a portion of a mandamus petition seeking money damages and finding the court of claims had exclusive jurisdiction over that claim). ¶ 47 However, “the determination of whether a suit is brought against the State and thus barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity does not depend on the identity of the formal parties, but rather on the issued raised and the relief sought.” Senn Park Nursing Center v. Miller, 104 Ill. 2d 169, 186 , 470 N.E.2d 1029, 1038 (1984) (citing Senn Park Nursing Center v. Miller, 1 | 3 | 5 |
Senn Park Nursing Center v. Millergreen2 sentences2011App. 3d 235, 237 , 491 N.E.2d 830, 832 (1986) (affirming the trial court’s order striking a portion of a mandamus petition seeking money damages and finding the court of claims had exclusive jurisdiction over that claim). ¶ 47 However, “the determination of whether a suit is brought against the State and thus barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity does not depend on the identity of the formal parties, but rather on the issued raised and the relief sought.” Senn Park Nursing Center v. Miller, 104 Ill. 2d 169, 186 , 470 N.E.2d 1029, 1038 (1984) (citing Senn Park Nursing Center v. Miller, 1 2011App.3d 235, 237 , 96 Ill.Dec. 551 , 491 N.E.2d 830, 832 (1986) (affirming the trial court's order striking a portion of a mandamus petition seeking money damages and finding the court of claims had exclusive jurisdiction over that claim). ¶ 47 However, "the determination of whether a suit is brought against the State and thus barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity does not depend on the identity of the formal parties, but rather on the issued raised and the relief sought." Senn Park Nursing Center v. Miller, 104 Ill.2d 169, 186 , 83 Ill.Dec. 609 , 470 N.E.2d 1029, 1038 (1984) (citing Sen | 2 | 3 |
Stone v. Chransgreen2 sentences2011App. 3d 235, 237 , 491 N.E.2d 830, 832 (1986) (affirming the trial court’s order striking a portion of a mandamus petition seeking money damages and finding the court of claims had exclusive jurisdiction over that claim). ¶ 47 However, “the determination of whether a suit is brought against the State and thus barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity does not depend on the identity of the formal parties, but rather on the issued raised and the relief sought.” Senn Park Nursing Center v. Miller, 104 Ill. 2d 169, 186 , 470 N.E.2d 1029, 1038 (1984) (citing Senn Park Nursing Center v. Miller, 1 2011App.3d 235, 237 , 96 Ill.Dec. 551 , 491 N.E.2d 830, 832 (1986) (affirming the trial court's order striking a portion of a mandamus petition seeking money damages and finding the court of claims had exclusive jurisdiction over that claim). ¶ 47 However, "the determination of whether a suit is brought against the State and thus barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity does not depend on the identity of the formal parties, but rather on the issued raised and the relief sought." Senn Park Nursing Center v. Miller, 104 Ill.2d 169, 186 , 83 Ill.Dec. 609 , 470 N.E.2d 1029, 1038 (1984) (citing Sen | 2 | 2 |
Balmoral Racing Club, Inc. v. Gonzalesgreen2 sentences2009Balmoral Racing Club, Inc. v. Gonzalez, 338 Ill. 2009Balmoral Racing Club, Inc. v. Gonzales, 338 Ill.App.3d 478, 485 , 272 Ill.Dec. 965 , 788 N.E.2d 269 (2003). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Betts v. Department of Revenue
green
2 sentences1984App. 3d 733, 746 , citing Moline Tool Co. v. Department of Revenue (1951), 410 Ill. 35, 37 ; Betts v. Department of Revenue (1979), 78 Ill. 1983(Moline Tool Co. v. Department of Revenue (1951), 410 Ill. 35, 37 , 101 N.E.2d 71, 72 ; Betts v. Department of Revenue (1979), 78 Ill. | 2 | 1983–1984 |
Moline Tool Co. v. Department of Revenue
green
2 sentences1984App. 3d 733, 746 , citing Moline Tool Co. v. Department of Revenue (1951), 410 Ill. 35, 37 ; Betts v. Department of Revenue (1979), 78 Ill. 1983(Moline Tool Co. v. Department of Revenue (1951), 410 Ill. 35, 37 , 101 N.E.2d 71, 72 ; Betts v. Department of Revenue (1979), 78 Ill. | 2 | 1983–1984 |