 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ill. Farmers Ins. Co. v. Kure, No. 3-05-0262,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT, April 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insurer had duty to defend and indemnify parents in underlying negligence action resulting from child's actions, which resulted in paralysis to another, as underlying complaint alleged only negligence by parents, and intentional act exclusion did not apply, as there were no allegations result was foreseeable from parents' allegedly negligent acts.
|
|||||
| Skidmore v. Gateway W. Ry. , NO. 5-01-0710,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIFTH DISTRICT, April 4, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In railroad crossing accident case, Illinois was forum non conveniens. Railway company's principal place of business was in Illinois. Little deference was given to estate administrator's choice of forum since administrator and decedent resided in Missouri and accident occurred in Missouri. All accident witnesses were Missouri residents.
|
|||||
| State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Kingsport Dev., LLC, No. 2-05-0568,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, April 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conclusion that the insurance company did not have duty to defend general contractor in underlying lawsuit brought against general contractor by subcontractor employee for injuries sustained at a construction project was error; since injuries potentially "arose out of" subcontractor's work, insurance company had duty to defend general contractor.
|
|||||
| Wilton v. Illini Manors, Inc., NO. 5-04-0590,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIFTH DISTRICT, April 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Forum non conveniens transfer of venue in wrongful death action involving a nursing home was properly denied. The nursing home's owner failed to show that an estate administrator's chosen venue had no connection to the chosen forum, and the balance of both private and public factors did not strongly favor transfer of the case to neighboring county.
|
|||||
| Nykaza v. Ill. Dep't of Empl., No. 3-05-0014,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT, April 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Review board erred in refusing to consider a worker's claim that he was entitled to unemployment benefits pursuant to 820 Ill. Comp. Stat. 405/601(B)(2), because while the worker did not raise the claim at the initial hearing, he gave the review board adequate notice of the claim, and thus the worker did not waive the claim.
|
|||||
| People v. Danenberger, No. 2-05-0425,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, April 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: 730 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/5-5-6 restitution order was vacated; police department was not a "victim" as it suffered only pecuniary losses in investigating defendant's false sexual assault claim. Order was also improper probation condition as it was not rehabilitative or reasonably related to crime as required by 730 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/5-5-3.
|
|||||
| Thornton v. Garcini, 3-04-0725,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT, April 6, 2006, Opinion filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment in favor of doctor was reversed, and new trial was ordered. At least two jurors read information in extrinsic articles on premature births, the articles went to the crucial issue of proximate cause in an infant's death, the child's mother was unable to question the information, and the trial court's prejudice investigation was incomplete.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
