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 1992–2024 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
THOMPSON BY THOMPSON v. Heydemanngreen2 sentences1996App. 3d 578, 582 , 596 N.E.2d 664 (1992) ("[s]ection 2—622 is a technical pleading requirement”). 1996Dec. 40 , 596 N.E.2d 664 (1992) ("section 2-622 is a technical pleading requirement"). | 1 | 3 |
Secrest v. Department of Correctionsgreen1 sentence2024See Secrest v. Department of Corrections, 64 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hagood v. O'CONNER
green
2 sentences1992The decision to dismiss a complaint for failure to conform to the requirements of section 2-622 is within the discretion of the trial court. ( McCastle v. Sheinkop (1987), 121 Ill.2d 188 , 117 Ill.Dec. 132 , 520 N.E.2d 293 .) Nevertheless, section 2-622 must be liberally construed, so that cases may be quickly and finally decided according to the substantive rights of the parties. ( Hagood v. O'Conner (1988), 165 Ill.App.3d 367, 371 , 116 Ill.Dec. 476, 478-79 , 519 N.E.2d 66, 68-69 .) Section 2-622 is a technical pleading requirement intended to deter frivolous lawsuits, not a substantive defe 1992App. 3d 367, 371 , 519 N.E.2d 66, 68-69 .) Section 2 — 622 is a technical pleading requirement intended to deter frivolous lawsuits, not a substantive defense. | 2 | 1992–1992 |
McCastle v. Sheinkop
green
2 sentences1992The decision to dismiss a complaint for failure to conform to the requirements of section 2-622 is within the discretion of the trial court. ( McCastle v. Sheinkop (1987), 121 Ill.2d 188 , 117 Ill.Dec. 132 , 520 N.E.2d 293 .) Nevertheless, section 2-622 must be liberally construed, so that cases may be quickly and finally decided according to the substantive rights of the parties. ( Hagood v. O'Conner (1988), 165 Ill.App.3d 367, 371 , 116 Ill.Dec. 476, 478-79 , 519 N.E.2d 66, 68-69 .) Section 2-622 is a technical pleading requirement intended to deter frivolous lawsuits, not a substantive defe 1992The decision to dismiss a complaint for failure to conform to the requirements of section 2-622 is within the discretion of the trial court. ( McCastle v. Sheinkop (1987), 121 Ill.2d 188 , 117 Ill.Dec. 132 , 520 N.E.2d 293 .) Nevertheless, section 2-622 must be liberally construed, so that cases may be quickly and finally decided according to the substantive rights of the parties. ( Hagood v. O'Conner (1988), 165 Ill.App.3d 367, 371 , 116 Ill.Dec. 476, 478-79 , 519 N.E.2d 66, 68-69 .) Section 2-622 is a technical pleading requirement intended to deter frivolous lawsuits, not a substantive defe | 2 | 1992–1992 |
Peterson v. Hinsdale Hospital
green
1 sentence1994Dec. 538 , 599 N.E.2d 84 ; Comfort v. Wheaton Family Practice (1992), 229 Ill.App.3d 828, 832 , 171 Ill.Dec. 529 , 594 N.E.2d 381 ; Lyon v. Hasbro Industries, Inc. (1987), 156 Ill.App.3d 649, 655 , 109 Ill.Dec. 41 , 509 N.E.2d 702 .) Section 2-622, however, was not intended "to burden the plaintiff with insurmountable hurdles prior to filing." ( Comfort, 229 Ill.App.3d at 832 , 171 Ill.Dec. 529 , 594 N.E.2d 381 .) It is a technical pleading requirement intended to deter frivolous lawsuits, not a substantive defense. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Comfort v. Wheaton Family Practice
green
2 sentences1994Dec. 538 , 599 N.E.2d 84 ; Comfort v. Wheaton Family Practice (1992), 229 Ill.App.3d 828, 832 , 171 Ill.Dec. 529 , 594 N.E.2d 381 ; Lyon v. Hasbro Industries, Inc. (1987), 156 Ill.App.3d 649, 655 , 109 Ill.Dec. 41 , 509 N.E.2d 702 .) Section 2-622, however, was not intended "to burden the plaintiff with insurmountable hurdles prior to filing." ( Comfort, 229 Ill.App.3d at 832 , 171 Ill.Dec. 529 , 594 N.E.2d 381 .) It is a technical pleading requirement intended to deter frivolous lawsuits, not a substantive defense. 1994Dec. 538 , 599 N.E.2d 84 ; Comfort v. Wheaton Family Practice (1992), 229 Ill.App.3d 828, 832 , 171 Ill.Dec. 529 , 594 N.E.2d 381 ; Lyon v. Hasbro Industries, Inc. (1987), 156 Ill.App.3d 649, 655 , 109 Ill.Dec. 41 , 509 N.E.2d 702 .) Section 2-622, however, was not intended "to burden the plaintiff with insurmountable hurdles prior to filing." ( Comfort, 229 Ill.App.3d at 832 , 171 Ill.Dec. 529 , 594 N.E.2d 381 .) It is a technical pleading requirement intended to deter frivolous lawsuits, not a substantive defense. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Lyon v. Hasbro Industries, Inc.
green
2 sentences1994Dec. 538 , 599 N.E.2d 84 ; Comfort v. Wheaton Family Practice (1992), 229 Ill.App.3d 828, 832 , 171 Ill.Dec. 529 , 594 N.E.2d 381 ; Lyon v. Hasbro Industries, Inc. (1987), 156 Ill.App.3d 649, 655 , 109 Ill.Dec. 41 , 509 N.E.2d 702 .) Section 2-622, however, was not intended "to burden the plaintiff with insurmountable hurdles prior to filing." ( Comfort, 229 Ill.App.3d at 832 , 171 Ill.Dec. 529 , 594 N.E.2d 381 .) It is a technical pleading requirement intended to deter frivolous lawsuits, not a substantive defense. 1994Dec. 538 , 599 N.E.2d 84 ; Comfort v. Wheaton Family Practice (1992), 229 Ill.App.3d 828, 832 , 171 Ill.Dec. 529 , 594 N.E.2d 381 ; Lyon v. Hasbro Industries, Inc. (1987), 156 Ill.App.3d 649, 655 , 109 Ill.Dec. 41 , 509 N.E.2d 702 .) Section 2-622, however, was not intended "to burden the plaintiff with insurmountable hurdles prior to filing." ( Comfort, 229 Ill.App.3d at 832 , 171 Ill.Dec. 529 , 594 N.E.2d 381 .) It is a technical pleading requirement intended to deter frivolous lawsuits, not a substantive defense. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.