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 1 courts 1981–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Larsen v. Carle Foundationgreen1 sentence2026“Ordinarily, the denial of summary judgment is not appealable, because such an order is interlocutory in nature.” Clark v. Children’s Memorial Hospital, 2011 IL 108656, ¶ 119 . “[W]hen a motion for summary judgment is denied and the case proceeds to trial, the order denying the motion for summary judgment merges with the judgment entered and is not appealable.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Larsen v. Carle Foundation, 386 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
In re Marriage of Gabrielgreen1 sentence2024See In re Marriage of Gabriel and Shamoun, 2020 IL App (1st) 182710, ¶ 33 . - 10 - No. 1-22-1485 her motion for reconsideration. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Clark v. Children's Memorial Hospital
green
1 sentence2026“Ordinarily, the denial of summary judgment is not appealable, because such an order is interlocutory in nature.” Clark v. Children’s Memorial Hospital, 2011 IL 108656, ¶ 119 . “[W]hen a motion for summary judgment is denied and the case proceeds to trial, the order denying the motion for summary judgment merges with the judgment entered and is not appealable.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Larsen v. Carle Foundation, 386 Ill. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
In Re Marriage of Clark
green
1 sentence2020Mark was required to (1) “keep and maintain in full force and effect a policy or policies of life insurance on his life in the amount of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand 9 No. 1-18-2501 ($250,000.00);” (2) name Irene “as the sole and irrevocable beneficiary thereof;” and (3) “provide on an annual basis proof of payments and the existence of said policy.” Irene did not seek to impose additional requirements on Mark that were not established by the MSA. ¶ 25 In Clark, the parties’ dissolution of marriage judgment, in relevant part, awarded the plaintiff, Madonna, the marital residence. 149 Ill. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Waggoner v. Waggoner
green
2 sentences2020Our supreme court affirmed, finding that the circuit court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to hear Mary’s motion because the motion sought “to compel [John] to remove the judgment lien and the second-mortgage lien from the chain of title[,]” while the dissolution judgment “did not provide that [John] was to perform these acts.” Id. at 53- 54. 2020Mary’s motion did not “not seek to enforce the terms of the decree, but instead to graft new obligations onto the decree.” Id. at 54 . ¶ 24 Here, unlike in Waggoner, Mark’s obligation to do the thing Irene’s petition sought was set forth in the MSA. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Matejczyk v. City of Chicago
green
2 sentences2011Matejczyk v. City of Chicago, 397 Ill.App.3d 1, 7 , 337 Ill.Dec. 166 , 922 N.E.2d 24 (2009). ¶ 18 We find that it would be fundamentally unfair to bar Mary's claim to quiet title on the basis of res judicata. 2011Matejczyk v. City of Chicago, 397 Ill.App.3d 1, 7 , 337 Ill.Dec. 166 , 922 N.E.2d 24 (2009). ¶ 18 We find that it would be fundamentally unfair to bar Mary's claim to quiet title on the basis of res judicata. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Lord v. Hubert
green
2 sentences1983(Lord v. Hubert (1957), 12 Ill. 2d 83 , 145 N.E.2d 77 .) Moreover, Mary’s claim of conflict in jurisdiction is without merit. 1983(Lord v. Hubert (1957), 12 Ill. 2d 83 , 145 N.E.2d 77 .) Moreover, Mary’s claim of conflict in jurisdiction is without merit. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Sullivan v. Sullivan
green
1 sentence1981Mary first argues the circuit court erred in failing to enforce this court’s decision of Sullivan v. Sullivan (1978), 57 Ill. | 1 | 1981–1981 |
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.