6 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 1999–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Dismuke v. Rand Cook Auto Sales, Inc.green2 sentences2019Dismuke v. Rand Cook Auto Sales, Inc., 378 Ill. 2018Dismuke v. Rand Cook Auto Sales, Inc. , 378 Ill. | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mitchell v. Fiat-Allis, Inc.
green
2 sentences2019We urge the supreme court to substitute gender-neutral language.) Rule 137 further provides that if a document is signed in violation of this rule, the court, either on a motion or its own initiative, may impose on the person who signed it “an appropriate sanction, which may include an order to pay to the other party or parties the amount of reasonable expenses incurred because of the filing of the pleading, motion or other document, including a reasonable attorney fee.” Id. ¶ 66 The supreme court designed Rule 137 to prevent abuse of the judicial process by sanctioning parties who file vexati 2018We urge the supreme court to substitute gender-neutral language.) Rule 137 further provides that if a document is signed in violation of this rule, the court, either on a motion or its own initiative, may impose on the person who signed it "an appropriate sanction, which may include an order to pay to the other party or parties the amount of reasonable expenses incurred because of the filing of the pleading, motion or other document, including a reasonable attorney fee." Id. ¶ 66 The supreme court designed Rule 137 to prevent abuse of the judicial process by sanctioning parties who file vexati | 2 | 2018–2019 |
Bachmann v. Kent
green
2 sentences1999Bachmann, 293 Ill.App.3d at 1086-87 , 228 Ill.Dec. 299 , 689 N.E.2d 171 . 1999Bachmann, 293 Ill.App.3d at 1086-87 , 228 Ill.Dec. 299 , 689 N.E.2d 171 . | 2 | 1999–1999 |
Lake Environmental, Inc. v. Arnold
green
1 sentence2025“If the rule is violated, the court may, upon motion or its own initiative, impose sanctions upon the individual who signed the filing, the represented party, or both.” Lake Environmental, Inc. v. Arnold, 2015 IL 118110, ¶ 13 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Blount v. Stroud
green
1 sentence2025Jan. 1, 2018) provides that pleadings, motions, or other documents must be signed by a party or attorney and that the signature “constitutes a certificate by him that *** to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief formed after reasonable inquiry it is well grounded in fact and is warranted by existing law or a good-faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law, and that it is not interposed for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation.” Additionally, Rule 137 provides that if a | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Mueller v. Phar-Mor, Inc.
green
1 sentence2023Id. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
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.