 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brown v. Cottrell, Inc., NO. 5-04-0099,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIFTH DISTRICT, April 24, 2007, Decision Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly denied a motion by the manufacturer of a trailer to dismiss a truck driver's products liability action based on forum non conveniens, as there was no showing that Illinois was an inconvenient forum, and no other potential forum had an interest in resolving the controversy strong enough to preclude resolution elsewhere.
|
|||||
| Evans v. Lima Lima Flight Team, Inc., No. 1-05-3423,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, SECOND DIVISION, April 24, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A waiver barred flying team members' liability for a member's death because it showed the parties' intent to do so and was not against public policy, but a fact question existed as to team liability for lack of emergency procedures, and assumption of the risk did not bar liability as the member may not have known the procedures might be inadequate.
|
|||||
| Howard v. Mo. Bone & Joint Ctr., Inc., NO. 5-05-0476,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIFTH DISTRICT, April 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly granted a motion by the owner of a fitness facility to dismiss plaintiff's personal injury action, because the Illinois long-arm statute, 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/2-209(c) (2002), did not provide jurisdiction, as the owner's actions in maintaining an internet site and mailing brochures were merely advertising.
|
|||||
| Somers v. Quinn, No. 2-05-0619,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, April 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although possession of a medical license was not necessary for expert to testify, trial court did not abuse discretion in excluding testimony based on the totality of the circumstances, including the lack of license. Denial of continuance was not abuse of discretion, as patient had notice expert was not licensed and failed to secure another expert.
|
|||||
| Zwicky v. Freightliner Custom Chassis Corp., No. 2-05-1177,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, April 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the chassis maker and motor home manufacturer on vehicle purchasers' claims against them for breach of express and implied warranties; vehicle purchasers' failure to respond to Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 216 request to admit did not concede damages did not exist at time of acceptance of motor home vehicle.
|
|||||
| Howell v. Howell (In re Estate of Howell), NO. 5-06-0224,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIFTH DISTRICT, April 26, 2007, Decision Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court clerk's filing of will contest petition in the wrong court division was not fatal to petition, and transfer to probate court was appropriate. Fact that executor was not served with petition within six months of filing of will was not fatal as 755 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/8-1 time limit was for filing petition, not serving the executor.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Casey, NO. 5-07-0020,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIFTH DISTRICT, April 26, 2007, Decision Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Former husband had standing to file a custody petition even though post-petition DNA testing showed he was not the child's father; husband's standing was determined as of date petition was filed, and at that time, husband was presumed father under 750 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 45/5, and he had standing under 750 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/601(b)(1).
|
|||||
| J.M v. R.P. (In re C.A.P.), No. 1-06-2739,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, SECOND DIVISION, April 26, 2007, Decided , April 26, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Record did not support the conclusion that a father was unfit based on abandonment or failure to maintain a reasonable degree of interest, concern, or responsibility, 750 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 50/1(D)(a), (b). The father exercised or attempted to exercise visitation. The mother never notified him of her whereabouts or encouraged visitation.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
