59 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1879–2026 12 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 |
|---|---|---|
Thompson v. MCA Distributing, Music Corp. of Americagreen2 sentences2003See Thompson v. MCA Distributing, Music Corp. of America, 257 Ill. 2003See Thompson v. MCA Distributing, Music Corp. of America , 257 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
Turner v. Williamsgreen2 sentences2003See Turner v. Williams, 326 Ill. 2003See Turner v. Williams , 326 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
Harris v. Cropmate Companygreen2 sentences2002See Harris v. Cropmate Co., 302 Ill.App.3d 364, 365 , 235 Ill.Dec. 795 , 706 N.E.2d 55 (1999); First Midwest Trust Co. v. Rogers, 296 Ill.App.3d 416, 427 , 233 Ill.Dec. 833 , 701 N.E.2d 1107 (1998); see also Handbook of Illinois Evidence § 702.4, at 626 ("Application of the Frye standard calls for a judicial determination * * * that the test's reliability is generally accepted in the particular scientific field in which the test belongs"). 2002See Harris v. Cropmate Co., 302 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
Chapski v. Copley Pressgreen2 sentences1990We reiterate the modified rule this court announced in Chapski: “[A] written or oral statement is to be considered in context, with the words and the implications therefrom given their natural and obvious meaning; if, as so construed, the statement may reasonably be innocently interpreted or reasonably be interpreted as referring to someone other than the plaintiff it cannot be actionable per se.” (Chapski, 92 Ill. 2d at 352 .) It is self-evident that a statement “reasonably” capable of a nondefamatory interpretation, given its verbal or literary context, should be so interpreted. 1984Further, the modified rule of Chapski v. Copley Press (1982), 92 Ill. 2d 344 , 442 N.E.2d 195 , has been applied with an emphasis on protecting an individual’s interest in vindicating his good name and reputation as well as first amendment interests. | 1 | 5 |
People v. Bannistergreen1 sentence2026Likewise, there was no error in allowing the recording into evidence at trial over defense counsel’s identical objection. ¶ 33 Gabrys’s third argument on appeal is that the circuit court erred when it refused to issue a modified instruction on the elements of harassment by telephone based on the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Counterman. ¶ 34 “If IPI instructions contain an applicable instruction on a subject about which the trial court determines the jury should be instructed, the trial court must use that instruction, unless the court determines that the instruction does not accur | 1 | 1 |
People v. Hillgreen1 sentence2025Thus, the defendant argues, that the State was precluded from arguing, as it did in closing, that the intent to kill Chairs or Holman transferred to the unintended victims on the lot, and the trial court erred when it provided instruction on the same. ¶ 80 Here, the law is clear: “a person may be properly convicted under the theory of transferred intent even if the State does not specifically allege that theory in the charging instrument.” People v. Hill, 276 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Lawtongreen1 sentence2025The factual predicate for defendant’s claim of conflict and ineffectiveness simply does not exist. ¶ 59 While an attorney cannot be expected to argue his own ineffectiveness when it would create a conflict, People v. Lawton, 212 Ill. 2d 285, 296 (2004), trial counsel never claimed to be ineffective. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Enochgreen1 sentence2025People v. Enoch, 122 Ill. 2d 176, 186 (1988) (to preserve a claim for review, a defendant must both object at trial and include the alleged error in a written posttrial motion). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Williamsgreen1 sentence2021See, e.g., People v. Williams, 147 Ill. 2d 173, 232 (1991) (“The testimony of an accomplice witness ‘ “has inherent weaknesses, being testimony of a confessed criminal and fraught with dangers of motives such as malice towards the accused, fear, threats, promises or hopes of leniency, or benefits from the prosecution.” ’ ” (quoting People v. Young, 128 Ill. 2d 1, 47-48 (1989), quoting People v. Hermens, 5 Ill. 2d 277, 285 (1955))). | 1 | 1 |
Rice v. Ford Motor Co.green1 sentence2021Under the modified rule, there was “no restriction on the court’s analysis based on when the plaintiff’s ‘reasonable diligence,’ or lack thereof, occurred, i.e., before or after the expiration of the statute of limitations.” Rice v. Ford Motor Co., 316 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Foutch v. O'BRYANTgreen1 sentence2021“Any doubts which may arise from the incompleteness of the record will be resolved against the appellant.” Foutch v. O’Bryant, 99 Ill. 2d 389, 392 (1984). ¶ 89 Moreover, a comparison of People’s Instruction 11 and IPI Criminal 3.14 demonstrates that People’s Instruction 11 was not a modified instruction such that defendant’s forfeiture should be excused. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Hermensgreen1 sentence2021See, e.g., People v. Williams, 147 Ill. 2d 173, 232 (1991) (“The testimony of an accomplice witness ‘ “has inherent weaknesses, being testimony of a confessed criminal and fraught with dangers of motives such as malice towards the accused, fear, threats, promises or hopes of leniency, or benefits from the prosecution.” ’ ” (quoting People v. Young, 128 Ill. 2d 1, 47-48 (1989), quoting People v. Hermens, 5 Ill. 2d 277, 285 (1955))). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Younggreen1 sentence2021See, e.g., People v. Williams, 147 Ill. 2d 173, 232 (1991) (“The testimony of an accomplice witness ‘ “has inherent weaknesses, being testimony of a confessed criminal and fraught with dangers of motives such as malice towards the accused, fear, threats, promises or hopes of leniency, or benefits from the prosecution.” ’ ” (quoting People v. Young, 128 Ill. 2d 1, 47-48 (1989), quoting People v. Hermens, 5 Ill. 2d 277, 285 (1955))). | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Ramseygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Holland v. Quinngreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Gutierrez
green
2 sentences2019Defendants should be allowed to withdraw properly entered guilty pleas only in order to avoid manifest injustice. [Citation.].” Id. ¶ 60 The Colorado court then adopted “a modified standard” for actual innocence claims after guilty pleas, in which the “defendant must present evidence from which the trial court may reasonably conclude that: (1) the newly discovered evidence was discovered after the entry of the plea, and, in the exercise of reasonable diligence by the defendant and his or her counsel, could not have been earlier discovered; (2) the charges that the People filed against the defe 2019Defendants should be allowed to withdraw properly entered guilty pleas only in order to avoid manifest injustice. [Citation.].” Id. ¶ 60 The Colorado court then adopted “a modified standard” for actual innocence claims after guilty pleas, in which the “defendant must present evidence from which the trial court may reasonably conclude that: (1) the newly discovered evidence was discovered after the entry of the plea, and, in the exercise of reasonable diligence by the defendant and his or her counsel, could not have been earlier discovered; (2) the charges that the People filed against the defe | 3 | 2018–2019 |
Morus v. Kapusta
green
2 sentences2021App. 3d at 489 . ¶ 53 On appeal, the appellate court found the modified instruction on life expectancy “was warranted and not in error.” Id. at 493 . 2021App. 3d at 489 . ¶ 53 On appeal, the appellate court found the modified instruction on life expectancy “was warranted and not in error.” Id. at 493 . | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Babikian v. Mruz
green
2 sentences2018Despite Our Disagreement With Babikian, We Find No Evidence, in the Present Case, of Duplicative Damages ¶ 55 In Babikian, the First District concluded: “In the absence of some supporting evidence in the record, the defendant’s claim that the modified instruction and the verdict form induced the jury to award the plaintiff a double recovery for her mental distress is mere conjecture.” Babikian, 2011 IL App (1st) 102579, ¶ 20 . 2017Despite Our Disagreement With Babikian , We Find No Evidence, in the Present Case, of Duplicative Damages ¶ 55 In Babikian , the First District concluded: "In the absence of some supporting evidence in the record, the defendant's claim that the modified instruction and the verdict form induced the jury to award the plaintiff a double recovery for her mental distress is mere conjecture." Babikian , 2011 IL App (1st) 102579 , ¶ 20, 353 Ill.Dec. 831 , 956 N.E.2d 959 . | 2 | 2017–2018 |
People v. Sharp
green
2 sentences2015People v. Sharp, 2015 IL App (1st) 130438, ¶¶ 79-80 . ¶5 For the following reasons, we do not find defendant's arguments persuasive. ¶6 BACKGROUND ¶7 I. 2015People v. Sharp, 2015 IL App (1st) 130438, ¶¶ 79-80 . ¶5 For the following reasons, we do not find defendant’s arguments persuasive. ¶6 BACKGROUND ¶7 I. | 2 | 2015–2015 |
People v. Minniefield
green
2 sentences2015People v. Minniefield, 2014 IL App (1st) 130535 . ¶3 While defendant's appeal of the second-stage dismissal of his postconviction petition was pending, defendant filed on November 27, 2013, a document entitled a "Motion to Vacate Conviction/Sentence as Void." The 2 No. 1-14-1094 document claimed that he was wrongly sentenced under a firearm enhancement provision because the jury was incorrectly instructed under a modified instruction. ¶4 On this appeal, defendant characterizes this document as a section 2-1401 petition (735 ILCS 5/2-1401(a) (West 2012)), but concedes that he "chose the incorre 2015People v. Minniefield, 2014 IL App (1st) 130535 . ¶3 While defendant’s appeal of the second-stage dismissal of his postconviction petition was pending, defendant filed on November 27, 2013, a document entitled a “Motion to Vacate Conviction/Sentence as Void.” The document claimed that he was wrongly sentenced under a firearm enhancement provision because the jury was incorrectly instructed under a modified instruction. ¶4 On this appeal, defendant characterizes this document as a section 2-1401 petition (735 ILCS 5/2-1401(a) (West 2012)), but concedes that he “chose the incorrect vehicle to pr | 2 | 2015–2015 |
People v. Jenkins
green
2 sentences2014Jenkins, 69 Ill. 2d at 66 . ¶ 85 The plaintiff argues that the modified instruction did not allow the jury to hold the UCMC responsible for the conduct of nurse Harmon. 2014Jenkins, 69 Ill. 2d at 66 . - 13 - ¶ 85 The plaintiff argues that the modified instruction did not allow the jury to hold the UCMC responsible for the conduct of nurse Harmon. | 2 | 2014–2014 |
Dillon v. Evanston Hospital
green
2 sentences2014Dillon, 199 Ill. 2d at 505 . ¶ 78 The plaintiff maintains that it was error to give the UCMC's modified instruction. 2014Dillon, 199 Ill. 2d at 505 . ¶ 78 The plaintiff maintains that it was error to give the UCMC’s modified instruction. | 2 | 2014–2014 |
People v. Carini
green
2 sentences2004The trial court ruled that the proposed modification was in accordance with a similar instruction approved in People v. Carini, 151 Ill. 2004In People v. Carini, 151 Ill. | 2 | 2004–2004 |
Smith v. City of Evanston
green
2 sentences2003Kamm argues that it was error to use this modified instruction, first proposed in Smith v. City of Evanston, 260 Ill. 2003Kamm argues that it was error to use this modified instruction, first proposed in Smith v. City of Evanston , 260 Ill. | 2 | 2003–2003 |
Wind v. Hy-Vee Food Stores, Inc.
green
2 sentences1999While we agree with Nilsson that it was error for the lower court to instruct the jury with defendants’ modified instruction since Nilsson’s instruction fairly and accurately stated the law (Wind, 272 Ill. 1999While we agree with Nilsson that it was error for the lower court to instruct the jury with defendants' modified instruction since Nilsson's instruction fairly and accurately stated the law ( Wind , 272 Ill. | 2 | 1999–1999 |
NWI International, Inc. v. Edgewood Bank
green
2 sentences1999App. 3d at 154 , 650 N.E.2d at 261 ), we do not agree that Nilsson’s right to a fair trial has been seriously prejudiced as a result thereof (NWI, 291 Ill. 1999App. 3d at 154 , 650 N.E.2d at 261 ), we do not agree that Nilsson's right to a fair trial has been seriously prejudiced as a result thereof ( NWI , 291 Ill. | 2 | 1999–1999 |
Lill v. Lill
green
2 sentences1997In Lill, the court modified this rule: "[A] voluntary conveyance by either party to a marriage contract, of his or her real estate, made without the knowledge or consent of the other on the eve, or in contemplation, of marriage, is prima facie a fraud upon the other’s marital rights, and the burden is upon the grantee to establish its validity. *** Not every voluntary conveyance is in fraud of the rights of the intended spouse, and if it be the intent of the grantor to provide for his children, and not to defraud his wife, such conveyance will not be held to be fraudulent where the advancement 1997In Lill, the court modified this rule: "[A] voluntary conveyance by either party to a marriage contract, of his or her real estate, made without the knowledge or consent of the other on the eve, or in contemplation, of marriage, is prima facie a fraud upon the other’s marital rights, and the burden is upon the grantee to establish its validity. *** Not every voluntary conveyance is in fraud of the rights of the intended spouse, and if it be the intent of the grantor to provide for his children, and not to defraud his wife, such conveyance will not be held to be fraudulent where the advancement | 2 | 1997–1997 |
People v. Scott
green
1 sentence2024But the trial court modified the instruction to require two verdict forms, “guilty” and “not guilty.” Id. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Fennell v. Illinois Central R.R. Co.
green
1 sentence2023Co., 2012 IL 113812, ¶ 12 , 987 N.E.2d 355 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. James
green
1 sentence2022After expressing bewilderment at why the State chose to proceed the way it did and offer a modified instruction, why the defense raised no objection, and why the trial court gave an erroneous objection, we held, “[t]he jury instruction as to sexual penetration was clearly erroneous.” James, 331 Ill. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Virginia v. Black
green
2 sentences2018The speaker need not actually intend to carry out the threat." See Black , 538 U.S. at 359 -60 , 123 S.Ct. 1536 ; Dye , 2015 IL App (4th) 130799 , ¶ 9, 394 Ill.Dec. 986 , 37 N.E.3d 465 . 2018The speaker need not actually intend to carry out the threat." See Black , 538 U.S. at 359 -60 , 123 S.Ct. 1536 ; Dye , 2015 IL App (4th) 130799 , ¶ 9, 394 Ill.Dec. 986 , 37 N.E.3d 465 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
People v. Dye
green
2 sentences2018The speaker need not actually intend to carry out the threat." See Black , 538 U.S. at 359 -60 , 123 S.Ct. 1536 ; Dye , 2015 IL App (4th) 130799 , ¶ 9, 394 Ill.Dec. 986 , 37 N.E.3d 465 . 2018The speaker need not actually intend to carry out the threat." See Black , 538 U.S. at 359 -60 , 123 S.Ct. 1536 ; Dye , 2015 IL App (4th) 130799 , ¶ 9, 394 Ill.Dec. 986 , 37 N.E.3d 465 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| Babikian v. Mruz green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| People v. Burnom green | 1 | 2004–2004 |
| First Midwest Trust Co. v. Rogers green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Nunley v. Mares green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Berry v. American Commercial Barge Lines neutral | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Law v. Central Illinois Public Service Co. green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| People v. Fierer green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Alvis v. Ribar green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| People v. Cloyd green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| People v. Jones green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| People v. Elliott green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| People v. Sweeney green | 1 | 1986–1986 |
| Costello v. Capital Cities Media, Inc. green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
| Ryan v. Fleischman green | 1 | 1983–1983 |
| People v. Bailey green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Avance v. Thompson green | 1 | 1963–1963 |
| Funk v. Eggleston green | 1 | 1934–1934 |
| Zimmer v. Sennott neutral | 1 | 1934–1934 |
| Morrison v. Schorr green | 1 | 1934–1934 |
| Hopps v. People green | 1 | 1920–1920 |
| People v. Hoban neutral | 1 | 1916–1916 |
| Chicago & Alton Railway Co. v. Averill green | 1 | 1908–1908 |
| City of Chicago v. Bixby neutral | 1 | 1907–1907 |
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.