 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| C.R.M. v. Chief Legal Counsel, No. 1-06-2447,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, SECOND DIVISION, April 17, 2007, Decided , April 17, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State human rights agency's chief legal counsel's decision to sustain dismissal of job applicant's charge of hiring discrimination was not an abuse of discretion; job applicant failed to show a prima facie case of employment discrimination, and, thus, did not show the Illinois Human Rights Act, 775 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/1-101, had been violated.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Thornton, No. 3-05-0722,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT, April 17, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a post-dissolution matter, a court held that any modification or enforcement of a judgment of dissolution entered in Illinois must be initiated by the filing of a petition and notice. As a result, a trial court erred by terminating an ex-wife's maintenance under 750 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/510(a), (c) merely upon ex-husband's oral assertions.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Waddick, No. 2-06-0363,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, April 17, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court lacked jurisdiction over a wife's appeal in a dissolution case. The decision that the wife filed a motion to reconsider was not a final judgment because it lacked provisions conforming to 750 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/602.1(b), and the wife had not filed a notice of appeal from the final judgment as required by Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 303(a).
|
|||||
| People v. Kuhns, No. 2-05-0442,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, April 17, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel (U.S. Const. amend. VI; Ill. Const. art. I, § 8) failed because he could not establish prejudice. The State overwhelmingly established defendant's direct participation in the destruction of the victim's mailbox. The trial would have been no different even without counsel's alleged deficiencies.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
