infraction rule (Illinois) · Go Syfert
← Illinois issues

infraction rule in Illinois

5 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1903–2015 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
People v. McDonoughgreen
ill · 2010 · cited in 2 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
2 sentences

2015Again, we disagree. "[C]ommunity caretaking refers to a capacity in which the police act when they are performing some task unrelated to the investigation of crime, such as helping children find their parents, mediating noise disputes, responding to calls about missing persons or sick neighbors, or helping inebriates find their way home." People v. McDonough, 239 Ill. 2d 260, 269 (2010).

2015Again, we disagree. “[C]ommunity caretaking refers to a capacity in which the police act when they are performing some task unrelated to the investigation of crime, such as helping children find their parents, mediating noise disputes, responding to calls about missing persons or sick neighbors, or helping inebriates find their way home.” People v. McDonough, 239 Ill. 2d 260, 269 (2010).

22

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Winner v. Kadow neutral
ill · 1940
2 sentences

1953This rule subjects to disciplinary action all members and employees of the department for "receiving or accepting a reward or gift from a person for a service rendered, or pretended to be rendered as a member of the Department without the consent of the Commissioner of Police." As a general canon of statutory construction a rule should be construed so as to give effect to each word, clause or sentence in order that no such word, clause or sentence may be deemed superfluous or void. ( Winner v. Kadow, *149 373 Ill. 192 .) It is apparent that to constitute an infraction of the rule it must appea

1953(Winner v. Kadow, 373 Ill. 192 .) It is apparent that to constitute an infraction of the rule it must appear that the unreported gift must have been accepted for a “service rendered as a member of the Department.” Thus it is essential that the gift be given not merely for a service rendered, but one rendered as a member of the departments The rule clearly does not prohibit a policeman from accepting all gifts; nor does it refer to all gifts accepted while a person is on the police force, or just because a person happens to be a policeman.

21953–1953
Weber v. Hertz neutral
ill · 1900
1 sentence

1903(Weber v. Hertz, 188 Ill. 68 ; Daum v. Cooper, 200 id. 538;) and the judgment of the court below might well be affirmed for an infraction of rule 15 of this court.

11903–1903

Where else courts name it

WA 10 (1939–2026) AL 6 (1944–2014) NY 5 (1877–1983) CA 5 (1990–2025) IL 5 (1903–2015) KS 3 (1917–2001) FL 3 (1887–2001) CT 2 (1992–1996) ND 2 (2011–2011) ID 2 (1939–1939)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check