dart analysis in Illinois

2017In light of this conflicting evidence, West Loop has not met its burden on appeal of showing that “all reasonable and unbiased persons would agree that the decision[s] [are] erroneous and that an opposite conclusion [in favor of the Murphy appraisal] is clearly evident.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Kraft Foods, 2013 IL App (2d) 121031, ¶ 51 , 997 N.E.2d 835 ; National City Bank of Michigan/Illinois, 331 Ill.

2017In light of this conflicting evidence, West Loop has not met its burden on appeal of showing that “all reasonable and unbiased persons would agree that the decision[s] [are] erroneous and that an opposite conclusion [in favor of the Murphy appraisal] is clearly evident.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Kraft Foods, 2013 IL App (2d) 121031, ¶ 51 , 997 N.E.2d 835 ; National City Bank of Michigan/Illinois, 331 Ill.

2017In light of this conflicting evidence, West Loop has not met its burden on appeal of showing that “all reasonable and unbiased persons would agree that the decision[s] [are] erroneous and that an opposite conclusion [in favor of the Murphy appraisal] is clearly evident.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Kraft Foods, 2013 IL App (2d) 121031, ¶ 51 , 997 N.E.2d 835 ; National City Bank of Michigan/Illinois, 331 Ill.

2017In light of this conflicting evidence, West Loop has not met its burden on appeal of showing that “all reasonable and unbiased persons would agree that the decision[s] [are] erroneous and that an opposite conclusion [in favor of the Murphy appraisal] is clearly evident.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Kraft Foods, 2013 IL App (2d) 121031, ¶ 51 , 997 N.E.2d 835 ; National City Bank of Michigan/Illinois, 331 Ill.

2017In light of this conflicting evidence, West Loop has not met its burden on appeal of showing that “all reasonable and unbiased persons would agree that the decision[s] [are] erroneous and that an opposite conclusion [in favor of the Murphy appraisal] is clearly evident.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Kraft Foods, 2013 IL App (2d) 121031, ¶ 51 , 997 N.E.2d 835 ; National City Bank of Michigan/Illinois, 331 Ill.

2017In light of this conflicting evidence, West Loop has not met its burden on appeal of showing that “all reasonable and unbiased persons would agree that the decision[s] [are] erroneous and that an opposite conclusion [in favor of the Murphy appraisal] is clearly evident.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Kraft Foods, 2013 IL App (2d) 121031, ¶ 51 , 997 N.E.2d 835 ; National City Bank of Michigan/Illinois, 331 Ill.

2023Id. ¶ 13 We agree with the circuit court’s conclusion that Brewer’s amended complaint contains claims that are predicated on attacking the validity of the 2019 eviction and are, therefore, barred under section 2-619(a)(4), but we disagree that all thirteen claims qualify as attacks on the prior judgment. ¶ 14 In his motion to dismiss, Dart asserted that Brewer’s amended complaint was barred by either res judicata or collateral estoppel, with Dart arguing that Brewer was improperly attempting to relitigate the 2019 eviction.

2020The other county defendants joined Dart’s motion. ¶ 13 On September 28, 2018, the Third Division of this court issued an opinion in Lopez v. Dart, 2018 IL App (1st) 170733 , a case in which another officer challenged both his termination by the Merit Board on administrative review, and the composition of the Merit Board itself.

2020The other county defendants joined Dart’s motion. ¶ 13 On September 28, 2018, the Third Division of this court issued an opinion in Lopez v. Dart, 2018 IL App (1st) 170733 , a case in which another officer challenged both his termination by the Merit Board on administrative review, and the composition of the Merit Board itself.

1979Subsequently, in granting Dart’s motion for summary judgment, the court ordered that plaintiffs’ counteraffidavits be stricken, citing as authority Meier v. Pocius (1958), 17 Ill.

1979App. 2d 332 , 150 N.E.2d 215 .