 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| People v. Bates, NO. 4-05-0851,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FOURTH DISTRICT, June 16, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant failed to appear for sentencing, he was not entitled to the protection of a hearing on his ability to pay before the trial court assessed him court-appointed counsel fees under 725 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/113-3.1 (2002).
|
|||||
| People v. Delores W. (In re Mark W.), No. 1-05-3370,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIFTH DIVISION, June 16, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appointment of GAL for mother, a mentally disabled adult who was a party to a termination of parental rights proceeding, pursuant to Juvenile Court Act, 705 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 405/1-1 et seq., was error; it had to be made under Probate Act, 755 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/1 et seq., and plenary guardian's letters of office had not been revoked.
|
|||||
| People v. Kizer, NO. 4-04-0653,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FOURTH DISTRICT, June 16, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's demand for speedy trial in traffic case had no force in felony case as statutory law did not require State to join felonies with misdemeanor charged by uniform citation and complaint in traffic case. Right to due process was not violated by destruction of blood samples as defendant failed to prove State destroyed samples in bad faith.
|
|||||
| People v. Sullivan, No. 1-03-3130,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIRST DIVISION, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's first-degree murder conviction for shooting the leader of a rival gang was affirmed, as a gang member's statement to another gang member qualified as a spontaneous declaration, and the evidence, including the eyewitness testimony of a third member of the victim's gang, was strong enough to be regarded as overwhelming.
|
|||||
| Roth v. Ill. Ins. Guar. Fund, No. 1-05-0025,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIRST DIVISION, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment grant to insurance guaranty fund was proper on the claimant's declaratory judgment action arising from its denial of his payment request of policy limits on insolvent insurer's policy; it was entitled under 215 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/546(a) to setoff its obligation to pay by greater amount medical insurers paid to claimant.
|
|||||
| State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Hooks, No. 1-05-2516,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIRST DIVISION, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An insurer had duty to defend an insured against tenant's negligence suit; tenant was her sister-in-law, and while tenant lived with her husband, the insured's brother, in building that insured and the husband owned, tenant was not an "insured" as to the insured, as severability clause had to be read independently as to the insured and the husband.
|
|||||
| Weger v. Weger (In re T.W.), NO. 5-06-0019,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIFTH DISTRICT, June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father's due process rights were adequately protected under the Illinois Marriage Act, 750 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/601 et seq., and the additional standing requirements of the Probate Act of 1975 did not apply to the Marriage Act. Evidence presented to the trial court was sufficient to award custody of the child to the grandparents.
|
|||||
| People v. Andrews, No. 3-04-0442,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT, June 20, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the issue was raised for the first time on appeal, sentencing order was modified to show correct time inmate should have been credited for presentence incarceration. Credit was mandatory under 730 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/5-8-7 and as issue was not a substantial constitutional one, it was not waived under 725 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/122-3.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Seffren, 1-04-3775,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, THIRD DIVISION, June 21, 2006, Decided , June 21, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Circuit court erred in entering a permanent injunction that prohibiting a boyfriend from having any contact with his girlfriend's children or from residing in her home without first holding an evidentiary hearing and providing the boyfriend an opportunity to respond and/or present evidence.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
