 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Allstate Ins. Co. v. Kovar, Nos. 2-05-0060 & 2-05-0410 cons.,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, February 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since insurer did not show threshold requirement for applying criminal conviction as estoppel in civil proceeding, which was that issue decided in criminal case was identical to issue presented in civil case, plea by insureds' son's friend to battery was not estoppel on son's alleged negligence in causing victim to be cut during a confrontation.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Hubbs, NO. 5-05-0013,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIFTH DISTRICT, February 1, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under 750 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/503(d), division of marital property was affirmed as 1) ex-husband had greater income than ex-wife; 2) wife was primary residential parent of two of parties' children, 3) there was no award of maintenance; and 4) award of 47 percent to husband and 53 percent to wife was an almost equal division of marital property.
|
|||||
| People v. Johnson, NO. 4-04-0550,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's conducting defendant's motion to suppress evidence and defendant's bench trial for unlawful possession of a controlled substance in a joint proceeding was affirmed as the court did not violate 725 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/114-12. Further, defendant acquiesced to holding the suppression hearing and the bench trial on the same day.
|
|||||
| Razor v. Hyundai Motor Am., Docket No. 98813.,
SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Award of consequential damages to car buyer was affirmed; state supreme court found 810 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/2-719(3) dictated independent approach be applied, and, thus award was allowed because limitation on awarding such damages would be unconscionable regardless of whether contract had limited remedy which failed of its essential purpose.
|
|||||
| Razor v. Hyundai Motor Am., Docket No. 98813.,
SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Filed--Modified Upon Denial of Rehearing June 29, 2006.
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Consequential damage award to car buyer was affirmed; state supreme court found 810 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/2-719(3) dictated independent approach be applied, and, thus, award was allowed because limitation on awarding such damages would be unconscionable, independent of whether contract had limited remedy which failed of its essential purpose.
|
|||||
| Southern Illinoisan v. Ill. Dep't of Pub. Health, Docket No. 98712.,
SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court did not err in affirming the trial court's judgment in the newspaper's favor, as the state health department did not show that disclosure of the information that the newspaper requested regarding childhood cancer would tend to lead to the identity of cancer registry patients in violation of 410 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 525/4(d).
|
|||||
| Timmons ex rel. R.L.S. v. L.S. (In re R.L.S.), Docket No. 100081.,
SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court correctly found standing requirement for guardianship petitioners was stated in 755 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/11-5(b); thus, maternal grandparents lacked standing to proceed with guardianship petition unless trial court found they rebutted presumption biological father was willing and able to make day-to-day child care decisions.
|
|||||
| People v. Young, 3-05-0218,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT, February 3, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant had a reasonable, subjective expectation of privacy in his suitcase in the truck of a vehicle, he had standing to challenge its search; because a police officer did not ask if a licensed driver was present after arresting the driver, the search was illegal under the Fourth Amendment, and the evidence was properly suppressed.
|
|||||
| Watson v. Waste Mgmt. of Ill., Inc., No. 3-04-0038,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT, February 3, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a citizen's complaint challenged the validity of a county board's authority to act, and because neither 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/18-101 nor case law expressly made quo warranto an exclusive remedy, the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint on that basis pursuant to 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/2-615.
|
|||||
| Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. W.H. McNaughton Builders, Inc., No. 2-05-0063,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, February 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Declaratory judgment that an insurer had the right to select its insured's attorney in an underlying action was reversed and remanded as a conflict of interest existed between the insured and the insurer that entitled the insured to be defended against the underlying allegations by an attorney of the insured's own choosing at the insurer's expense.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
