ILCS » Chapter 755 · Act 8

755 ILCS 8/106

Taking testimony in another state

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(755 ILCS 8/106)
    Sec. 106. Taking testimony in another state.
    (a) In a guardianship or protective proceeding, in addition to other procedures that may be available, testimony of a witness who is located in another state may be offered by deposition or other means allowable in this state for testimony taken in another state. The court on its own motion may order that the testimony of a witness be taken in another state and may prescribe the manner in which and the terms upon which the testimony is to be taken.
    (b) In a guardianship or protective proceeding, a court in this state may permit a witness located in another state to be deposed or to testify by telephone or audiovisual or other electronic means. A court of this state shall cooperate with the court of the other state in designating an appropriate location for the deposition or testimony.
    (c) Documentary evidence transmitted from another state to a court of this state by technological means that do not produce an original writing may not be excluded from evidence on an objection based on the best evidence rule.
(Source: P.A. 96-177, eff. 1-1-10.)


 
    (755 ILCS 8/Art. 2 heading)
Article 2. Jurisdiction
(Source: P.A. 96-177, eff. 1-1-10.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2017–2017 · leading case: In re Estate of Kusmanoff
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Estate of Kusmanoff (2017) illappct · cites it 4× “755 ILCS 8/106 (West 2014). Finally, due to a superseding petition to terminate the guardianship, we find any issue regarding the circuit court’s failure to rule on MaryLou’s April 13, 2016, petition to terminate the guardianship is moot but point the circuit court to section…”
In re Estate of Kusmanoff (2017) illappct · cites it 4× “755 ILCS 8/106 (West 2014). Finally, due to a superseding petition to terminate the guardianship, we find any issue regarding the circuit court’s failure to rule on MaryLou’s April 13, 2016, petition to terminate the guardianship is moot but point the circuit court to section…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.