5 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 2007–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
In Re Marriage of Hasabnisgreen2 sentences2007We held that section 503(j) of the Act does not expressly require the trial court to consider the necessity of the petitioner’s fees; however, it did “incorporat[e] a reasonability requirement.” Hasabnis, 322 Ill. 2007We held that section 503(j) of the Act does not expressly require the trial court to consider the necessity of the petitioner’s fees; however, it did “incorporate] a reasonability requirement.” Hasabnis, 322 Ill. | 3 | 5 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.