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.
6 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2004 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 |
|---|---|---|
Lott v. Stranggreen1 sentence2001See Lott v. Strang, 312 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Henrich v. Libertyville High School
green
2 sentences2001Henrich, 186 Ill. 2d at 395 . 2001Henrich, 186 Ill.2d at 395 , 238 Ill.Dec. 576 , 712 N.E.2d 298 . *140 Joseph Academy argues that Henrich 's discussion of the inapplicability of the Tort Immunity Act to private schools was dicta; we disagree, as the court's discussion was integral to its holding that section 3-108(a) of the Tort Immunity Act, and not section 24-24 of the School Code, applied to the plaintiffs' complaint. | 2 | 2001–2001 |
Faulkner-King v. Wicks
green
2 sentences2000The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of plaintiffs claim for damages under article I, section 2, holding that the Human Rights Act “is an exclusive remedy for civil rights violations *** [under] article I, section 2.” Faulkner-King, 226 Ill. 2000The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of plaintiffs claim for damages under article I, section 2, holding that the Human Rights Act, "is an exclusive remedy for civil rights violations under article I, section 2." Faulkner-King , 226 Ill. | 2 | 2000–2000 |
Oliveira v. Amoco Oil Co.
green
1 sentence2004Oliveira, 201 Ill. 2d at 154-55 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
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.