motions hearing (Illinois) · Go Syfert
← Illinois issues

motions hearing in Illinois

7 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1943–2026 3 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 (2)

CaseFollowedCited
People v. Postgreen
illappct · 2025 · cited in 1 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026See, e.g., People v. Rhodes, 2026 IL App (4th) 251088-U, ¶ 7 (noting the detained defendant filed a “ ‘Motion for Release from Pretrial Detention and/or Motion for Relief,’ ” arguing circumstances had changed since her original detention that warranted her release); Post, 2025 IL App (4th) 250598, ¶ 11 (noting the detained defendant filed a motion for review of his pretrial detention order pursuant to section 110-6.1(i-5) of the Code, arguing a change in circumstances had occurred to warrant his pretrial release); People v. Cervantes, 2024 IL App (4th) 240624-U , ¶ 21 (noting the detained defe

11
Walker v. Chasteengreen
ill · 2025 · cited in 1 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026Mpower argued that sovereign immunity did not bar its suit because Mpower was seeking to prevent future unconstitutional action “rather than redress a past wrong with monetary damages.” See Walker v. Chasteen, 2025 IL 130288, ¶ 23 (“[A] complaint seeking to prospectively enjoin unlawful conduct may be brought in the circuit court without offending sovereign immunity principles.”). -4- ¶ 13 On February 4, 2025, at 9:53 a.m., Mpower filed a “Supplement to the Motion by Mpower to Amend the Complaint for Injunctive Relief and Declaratory Relief.” Mpower asked for leave to file a “revised proposed

11

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
People v. Taylor green
ill · 2011
1 sentence

2025While acknowledging the State could introduce the evidence under the silent witness theory if the proper foundation was laid, the defense noted that the State provided no indication that the footage, retrieved from a civilian, could be properly admitted in accordance with People v. Taylor, 2011 IL 110067 . ¶ 18 The parties addressed the motions to bar the surveillance footage, with defense counsel noting that the parties had briefly argued the motions before the prior judge.

12025–2025
People v. Dominique F. green
ill · 1991
2 sentences

2006In re Dominique F., 145 Ill. 2d at 316-17 , 583 N.E.2d at 557-58 .

2006In re Dominique F., 145 Ill. 2d at 316-17 , 583 N.E.2d at 557-58 .

12006–2006
Franks v. Delaware green
scotus · 1978
2 sentences

1991In Franks v. Delaware (1978), 438 U.S. 154 , 57 L.

1991In Franks v. Delaware (1978), 438 U.S. 154 , 57 L.

11991–1991
People v. Ross green
illappct · 1971
1 sentence

1983His quiescence amounted to an acquiescence to a delay in having this case in readiness for trial.” 132 Ill.

11983–1983
The People v. Novak green
ill · 1938
1 sentence

1943People v. Novak, 370 Ill. 220 ; People v. Krotz, 341 Ill. 214 .

11943–1943
The People v. Krotz green
ill · 1930
1 sentence

1943People v. Novak, 370 Ill. 220 ; People v. Krotz, 341 Ill. 214 .

11943–1943

Where else courts name it

MD 73 (1990–2026) GA 37 (1983–2026) CO 28 (1981–2026) SD 27 (1935–2024) DC 23 (1973–2024) TX 14 (1989–2025) KS 13 (2005–2026) OH 11 (1999–2024) NY 9 (1947–2014) MS 8 (1994–2024) MA 7 (1942–2019) IL 7 (1943–2026) LA 6 (1961–2023) WY 6 (1974–2021) SC 6 (2009–2023) VA 6 (2008–2024) AL 5 (1972–2017) NC 5 (1987–2017) CA 4 (1948–1985) VT 4 (1996–2018) UT 4 (1930–2021) AZ 3 (2012–2017) MT 3 (2011–2021) NM 3 (1984–1990) PA 3 (2017–2023) OR 3 (2006–2025) IA 2 (1935–2016) NH 2 (1970–2017) WA 2 (2009–2009) CT 2 (1979–2024) ID 2 (2013–2018)

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