7 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 2010–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Blum v. Kostergreen2 sentences2012To uphold a trial court’s maintenance determination pursuant to a general review, we must find that “the trial court considered the enumerated statutory factors and that the record supports its decision.” Blum, 235 Ill. 2d at 38 . 2011Further, the Blum court found that the marital settlement agreement "did not provide for consideration of any terms other than the statutory factors generally applicable to the trial court's review and modification of maintenance," and reversed the appellate court by concluding that the trial court properly considered the enumerated statutory factors under sections 504(a) and 510(a-5) of the Act and that "the record support[ed] its decision to continue Judy's award of maintenance at a reduced amount." Id. at 34-36, 38 , 335 Ill.Dec. 614 , 919 N.E.2d at 341-42, 344 . | 2 | 3 |
Department of Public Aid Ex Rel. Davis v. Brewergreen1 sentence2021As already noted, modifications to the allocation of parenting time and significant decision-making responsibilities are governed by section 610.5 of the Act, which provides that the court can modify a parenting plan or allocation judgment when the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that (1) there has been a substantial change in circumstances since the existing parenting plan or allocation judgment was entered and (2) modification is necessary to serve the best interests of the child. 750 ILCS 5/610.5(c) (West 2020); see also Brewer, 183 Ill. 2d at 555 . ¶ 121 In determining the | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gaylor v. Village of Ringwood
green
2 sentences2010Critically, in reviewing the statutory requirements, the appellate court addressed only the enumerated statutory factors and not the "is entitled to disconnection" language, unlike the Gaylor court (Gaylor, 363 Ill. 2010Critically, in reviewing the statutory requirements, the appellate court addressed only the enumerated statutory factors and not the “is entitled to disconnection” language, unlike the Gay lor court (Gaylor, 363 Ill. | 2 | 2010–2010 |
People v. Eppinger
green
1 sentence2025Jan. 1, 2011) provides, absent an enumerated statutory exception, evidence of “other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith.” Such other-crimes evidence may be admissible for other purposes, including “proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.” Id. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
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.