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 1 courts 1992–2010 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 |
|---|---|---|
Office Mates 5, North Shore, Inc. v. Hazengreen2 sentences2005App. 3d at 936 ; see Office Mates 5, 234 Ill. 1997Office Mates 5, North Shore, 234 Ill. | 1 | 3 |
Audio Properties, Inc. v. Kovachgreen1 sentence2003Audio Properties, Inc. v. Kovach , 275 Ill. App. 3d 145, 149 (1995). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Springfield Rare Coin Galleries, Inc. v. Mileham
green
2 sentences2005“When the employer’s business is sales of a nonunique product, its customers also do business with its competitors, are generally known to the competitors, or are ascertainable by reference to telephone or specialized directories, the near-permanency test will not be satisfied.” Springfield Rare Coin Galleries, 250 Ill. 1994App. 3d at 935 .) Moreover, “[w]hen the employer’s business is sales of a nonunique product, its customers also do business with its competitors, are generally known to the competitors, or are ascertainable by reference to telephone or specialized directories, the near-permanency test will not be satisfied.” Springfield Rare Coin Galleries, Inc., 250 Ill. | 2 | 1994–2005 |
Canfield v. Spear
green
2 sentences1993(Canfield v. Spear (1969), 44 Ill. 2d 49, 51-52 , 254 N.E.2d 433, 434 .) However, even though engaged in providing professional services, when the evidence indicates the clients utilize several providers of the same type of professional services simultaneously, the near-permanency test will not be satisfied. 1993(Canfield v. Spear (1969), 44 Ill. 2d 49, 51-52 , 254 N.E.2d 433, 434 .) However, even though engaged in providing professional services, when the evidence indicates the clients utilize several providers of the same type of professional services simultaneously, the near-permanency test will not be satisfied. | 2 | 1992–1993 |
Hanchett Paper Co. v. Melchiorre
green
1 sentence2010However, no fast rules apply in regard to outcome, for as we said in Hanchett, to satisfy the near-permanency test a business need not “show that its customer relationships are perpetual or indissoluble, that it has an exclusive relationship with its customers, or that a near-permanent relationship existed with each customer.” Hanchett, 341 Ill. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Williams & Montgomery, Ltd. v. Stellato
green
1 sentence1993Williams & Montgomery, Ltd. v. Stellato (1990), 195 Ill. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Agrimerica, Inc. v. Mathes
green
1 sentence1993(Agrimerica, Inc. v. Mathes (1990), 199 Ill. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Lee/O'Keefe Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Ferega
green
1 sentence1993App. 3d at 1004 , 516 N.E.2d at 1318 .) The First District Appellate Court has noted factors which are relevant to determining whether the near-permanency test has been met, including (1) the number of years required to develop the clientele; (2) the amount of money invested to acquire clients; (3) the degree of difficulty acquiring clients; (4) the extent of personal customer contact by the employee; (5) the extent of the employer’s knowledge of its clients; (6) the duration of the customers’ association with the employer; and (7) the continuity of the employer-customer relationships. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Millard Maintenance Service Co. v. Bernero
green
1 sentence1992With respect to enforcement of restrictive covenants on this ground, we have specifically rejected the notion that “ ‘only trade secrets — as distinct from confidential information — are entitled to legal protection.’ ” (Millard Maintenance Service Co., 207 Ill. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Cockerill v. Wilson
green
2 sentences1992The near-permanency test has as its origin the supreme court cases of Canfield v. Spear (1969), 44 Ill. 2d 49 , 254 N.E.2d 433 , and Cockerill v. Wilson (1972), 51 Ill. 2d 179 , 281 N.E.2d 648 . 1992The near-permanency test has as its origin the supreme court cases of Canfield v. Spear (1969), 44 Ill. 2d 49 , 254 N.E.2d 433 , and Cockerill v. Wilson (1972), 51 Ill. 2d 179 , 281 N.E.2d 648 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Label Printers v. Pflug
green
1 sentence1992(See Label Printers v. Pflug (1991), 206 Ill. | 1 | 1992–1992 |