 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Pappas v. Pella Corp., No. 1-05-1702,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, SECOND DIVISION, February 21, 2006, Decided , February 21, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act claims was reversed. As consumers were alleging deceptive practices by window manufacturers in failing to disclose known defect in their windows, consumers were not required to plead elements of unfairness or how failure to disclose was immoral, unethical, or unscrupulous.
|
|||||
| People v. Howard, No. 1-04-2865,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIRST DIVISION, February 21, 2006, Decided , February 21, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/2-1401(a) was not available to attack a judgment on the grounds that evidence which did not even exist at the time of that judgment should have been presented; thus, fact that inmate served 16 years of sentence under harsher conditions than the trial judge would have imposed did not impact the validity of sentence.
|
|||||
| Smolinski v. Vojta, No. 1-04-3851,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIRST DIVISION, February 21, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court had to dismiss appeal of the denial of the husband's post-divorce proceeding motion for judgment for lack of jurisdiction; notice of appeal was filed more than 30 days after entry of the order which the husband sought to have reviewed, which meant the notice of appeal was untimely filed under Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 303(a)(1).
|
|||||
| Bd. of Educ. v. Sered, 1-04-3223,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, THIRD DIVISION, February 22, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board's order was affirmed as the finding that a union and a school district entered into a collective bargaining agreement was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The Board also did not abuse its discretion by ordering the rescission of all policies and procedures inconsistent with the agreement.
|
|||||
| Feret v. Schillerstrom, No. 2-05-0355,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Without evidence that a 2003 resolution by a county board was legally inoperative or had been explicitly or implicitly repealed, it remained in effect, and thus, a resident's claim that the enactment of the resolution was violated the Illinois Open Meetings Act was not rendered moot by the enactment of a similar resolution in 2004.
|
|||||
| Paris-Custardo v. Great Am. Ins. Co., Nos. 1-05-1007 and 1-05-1030 (Consolidated),
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, THIRD DIVISION, February 22, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where commercial policy endorsement excepted from exclusion car insurance provided by policy listed in schedule and where listed policy covered driver, only insurance excepted from exclusion was insurance provided in commercial policy prior to exclusion was also provided for in underlying policy, and driver was not covered under such insurance.
|
|||||
| People v. Dryden, No. 2-02-0999,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Adding a 15-year sentence enhancement on to defendant's home invasion sentence was not error; 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/12-11(a)(3),(c) allowed it and it did not violate Illinois proportionate penalties clause, Ill. Const. art. I, § 11, as recent case law did not permit him to compare sentence with sentence for offense with different elements.
|
|||||
| Zych v. Tucker, No. 1-05-1906,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, THIRD DIVISION, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Absolute privilege did not apply to police officer's defamation action where declarant sent a complaint to sheriff's department's office of internal affairs. Office was not quasi-judicial. It only had power to investigate complaints and to make recommendations to sheriff, who could, under 55 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/3-7011, suspend or file charges.
|
|||||
| Noakes v. AMTRAK, No. 1-04-2851,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIFTH DIVISION, February 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In action under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S.C.S. § 51 et seq., no Frye hearing was required because mechanic's medical experts were not offering a new or novel scientific principle, technique, or test and they were offering "pure opinion testimony" as to his injuries; thus, directed verdict in favor of railroad was reversed.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
