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.
7 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2022 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hartline v. Celotex Corp.green1 sentence2022Hartline v. Celotex Corp., 272 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Fredericks v. Liberty Mutual Insurancegreen1 sentence1999Since “the paramount purpose behind the intentional tort exception is to prevent persons who commit intentional torts from using the compensation law as a shield against liability” (Fredericks v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., 255 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Schefsky v. Evening News Ass'ngreen2 sentences1991See Schefsky v. Evening News Association (1988), 169 Mich. App. 223, 226-28 , 425 N.W.2d 768, 770 . 1991See Schefsky v. Evening News Association (1988), 169 Mich. App. 223, 226-28 , 425 N.W.2d 768, 770 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Copass v. Illinois Power Co.
green
1 sentence1995(Copass v. Illinois Power Co. (1991), 211 Ill. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Jablonski v. Multack
green
1 sentence1994(See Meerbrey v. Marshall Field & Co. (1990), 139 Ill. 2d 455 , 564 N.E.2d 1222 ; Jablonski v. Multack (1978), 63 Ill. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Meerbrey v. Marshall Field & Co.
green
2 sentences1994(See Meerbrey v. Marshall Field & Co. (1990), 139 Ill. 2d 455 , 564 N.E.2d 1222 ; Jablonski v. Multack (1978), 63 Ill. 1994(See Meerbrey v. Marshall Field & Co. (1990), 139 Ill. 2d 455 , 564 N.E.2d 1222 ; Jablonski v. Multack (1978), 63 Ill. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Schenk v. Schenk
green
2 sentences1993(See Schenk, 100 Ill.App.2d at 204-05 , 241 N.E.2d 12 .) The court, nonetheless, found that there was no reason to eliminate the immunity for conduct "arising out of the family relationship and directly connected with the family purposes and objectives," where the negligence was merely the product of intrafamily living. ( Schenk, 100 Ill. 1993(See Schenk, 100 Ill. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Beauchamp v. Dow Chemical Co.
green
2 sentences1991The true intentional tort standard [should] keep the distinction clear.” (Beauchamp v. Dow Chemical Co. (1986), 427 Mich. 1, 24-25 , 398 N.W.2d 882, 893 .) While the Beauchamp court adopted the substantial-certainty standard, despite the reservations quoted above, that decision was later legislatively overruled and replaced by the specific-intent-to-injure standard. 1991The true intentional tort standard [should] keep the distinction clear.” (Beauchamp v. Dow Chemical Co. (1986), 427 Mich. 1, 24-25 , 398 N.W.2d 882, 893 .) While the Beauchamp court adopted the substantial-certainty standard, despite the reservations quoted above, that decision was later legislatively overruled and replaced by the specific-intent-to-injure standard. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Brandt v. Keller
green
2 sentences1984As cogently observed by the court in Brandt v. Keller (1952), 413 Ill. 503 , 109 N.E.2d 729 , neither of these stated concerns can be said to have been served in a situation where, as here, an intentional tort claim arises during the final throes of a marriage. 1984As cogently observed by the court in Brandt v. Keller (1952), 413 Ill. 503 , 109 N.E.2d 729 , neither of these stated concerns can be said to have been served in a situation where, as here, an intentional tort claim arises during the final throes of a marriage. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.