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.
5 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co.green2 sentences2017See also Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co., 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 (1963)5 (finding that “[t]he mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability and, under the circumstances, here, it would appear that such an advantage was knowingly and intentionally taken of both defendant and the trial court”). ¶ 33 In the case at bar, defendant attempts to paint his situation as similar to those in the cases in which the due diligence requirement has been relaxed by claiming that plaintiff “failed to even advise the trial cour 1990(See Smith v. Dunaway (1966), 77 Ill. App. 2d 1, 5 , 221 N.E.2d 665 .) In Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 , 190 N.E.2d 348 , the Illinois Supreme Court criticized the “precipitate manner in which damages were assessed” and stated as follows: “The mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***.*** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” (See also Goc | 3 | 5 |
Molden v. Reidgreen2 sentences2017We emphasize that “[t]he mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***. *** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” Molden v. Reid, 200 Ill. 2016We emphasize that “[t]he mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***. *** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” Molden v. Reid, 200 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Graf's Beverages of Illinois, Inc. v. Tauber
green
1 sentence1990(See Smith v. Dunaway (1966), 77 Ill. App. 2d 1, 5 , 221 N.E.2d 665 .) In Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 , 190 N.E.2d 348 , the Illinois Supreme Court criticized the “precipitate manner in which damages were assessed” and stated as follows: “The mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***.*** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” (See also Goc | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Goczeski v. Horizon Development Corp.
green
2 sentences1990(See Smith v. Dunaway (1966), 77 Ill. App. 2d 1, 5 , 221 N.E.2d 665 .) In Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 , 190 N.E.2d 348 , the Illinois Supreme Court criticized the “precipitate manner in which damages were assessed” and stated as follows: “The mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***.*** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” (See also Goc 1990(See Smith v. Dunaway (1966), 77 Ill. App. 2d 1, 5 , 221 N.E.2d 665 .) In Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 , 190 N.E.2d 348 , the Illinois Supreme Court criticized the “precipitate manner in which damages were assessed” and stated as follows: “The mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***.*** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” (See also Goc | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Chambers v. Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center
green
2 sentences1990Luke’s Medical Center (1987), 155 Ill. App. 3d 458, 467 , 508 N.E.2d 426 , appeal denied (1987), 116 Ill. 2d 549 , 515 N.E.2d 102 ) and the defendant is entitled to “cross-examine plaintiff’s witnesses and introduce any material evidence bearing on damages, take all proper measures to preserve questions in those respects for review, and request the giving of pertinent instructions.” Smith v. Dunaway, 77 Ill. App. 2d at 6 . 1990Luke’s Medical Center (1987), 155 Ill. App. 3d 458, 467 , 508 N.E.2d 426 , appeal denied (1987), 116 Ill. 2d 549 , 515 N.E.2d 102 ) and the defendant is entitled to “cross-examine plaintiff’s witnesses and introduce any material evidence bearing on damages, take all proper measures to preserve questions in those respects for review, and request the giving of pertinent instructions.” Smith v. Dunaway, 77 Ill. App. 2d at 6 . | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Smith v. Dunaway
neutral
2 sentences1990(See Smith v. Dunaway (1966), 77 Ill. App. 2d 1, 5 , 221 N.E.2d 665 .) In Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 , 190 N.E.2d 348 , the Illinois Supreme Court criticized the “precipitate manner in which damages were assessed” and stated as follows: “The mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***.*** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” (See also Goc 1990(See Smith v. Dunaway (1966), 77 Ill. App. 2d 1, 5 , 221 N.E.2d 665 .) In Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 , 190 N.E.2d 348 , the Illinois Supreme Court criticized the “precipitate manner in which damages were assessed” and stated as follows: “The mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***.*** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” (See also Goc | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Joseph A. Thorsen Co. v. Evans
green
2 sentences1990(See Smith v. Dunaway (1966), 77 Ill. App. 2d 1, 5 , 221 N.E.2d 665 .) In Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 , 190 N.E.2d 348 , the Illinois Supreme Court criticized the “precipitate manner in which damages were assessed” and stated as follows: “The mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***.*** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” (See also Goc 1990(See Smith v. Dunaway (1966), 77 Ill. App. 2d 1, 5 , 221 N.E.2d 665 .) In Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 , 190 N.E.2d 348 , the Illinois Supreme Court criticized the “precipitate manner in which damages were assessed” and stated as follows: “The mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***.*** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” (See also Goc | 1 | 1990–1990 |
612 North Michigan Avenue Building Corp. v. Factsystem, Inc.
green
2 sentences1990(See Smith v. Dunaway (1966), 77 Ill. App. 2d 1, 5 , 221 N.E.2d 665 .) In Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 , 190 N.E.2d 348 , the Illinois Supreme Court criticized the “precipitate manner in which damages were assessed” and stated as follows: “The mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***.*** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” (See also Goc 1990(See Smith v. Dunaway (1966), 77 Ill. App. 2d 1, 5 , 221 N.E.2d 665 .) In Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 , 190 N.E.2d 348 , the Illinois Supreme Court criticized the “precipitate manner in which damages were assessed” and stated as follows: “The mere fact that a defendant is defaulted does not give to the plaintiff a right or claim to the assessment of damages unrelated to liability ***.*** *** Although defaulted, where the action is in tort or for an unliquidated claim or amount, a defendant nonetheless has the right to be heard on the matter of damages.” (See also Goc | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Bonanza International, Inc. v. Mar-Fil, Inc.
green
1 sentence1986Under the Ellman doctrine [Ellman v. De Ruiter (1952), 412 Ill. 285 ], we believe that fairness and justice required the exercise of equitable powers to obtain relief from a judgment so obtained.” (Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 .) Similarly, in Bonanza International, Inc. v. Mar-Fil, Inc. (1984), 128 Ill. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Ellman v. De Ruiter
green
1 sentence1986Under the Ellman doctrine [Ellman v. De Ruiter (1952), 412 Ill. 285 ], we believe that fairness and justice required the exercise of equitable powers to obtain relief from a judgment so obtained.” (Elfman v. Evanston Bus Co. (1963), 27 Ill. 2d 609, 614 .) Similarly, in Bonanza International, Inc. v. Mar-Fil, Inc. (1984), 128 Ill. | 1 | 1986–1986 |