 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Abruzzo v. City of Park Ridge, No. 1-06-2116,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, SIXTH DIVISION, June 22, 2007, Decided, June 22, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly dismissed plaintiff's action against a city alleging that EMTs failed to provide emergency medical care to plaintiff's son, because immunity under 745 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 10/6-105 and 6-106 (2004) was only lost once a correct diagnosis was made.
|
|||||
| Chochorowski v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., NO. 5-06-0308,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIFTH DISTRICT, June 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A circuit erred in denying a company's oral motion to dismiss an individual Mo. Ann. Stat. § 407.025 (2004) claim as its specific venue requirement constituted an integral part of the substantive right that was created by the Missouri statute and thus, Illinois's general venue statute did not circumvent that statute's venue limitation.
|
|||||
| Miller v. Metro. Water Reclamation Dist., No. 1-06-1230,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIFTH DIVISION, June 22, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Adverse possession complaint failed because the subject property, to which a water reclamation district held title and retained the right under a lease with a city to reenter, was public property for the use and benefit of the people of the State of Illinois. Thus, it was not subject to adverse possession under 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/13-101.
|
|||||
| People v. Brown, No. 1-05-0995,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, SIXTH DIVISION, June 22, 2007, Decided, June 22, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a witness died after testifying at defendant's bond violation hearing, it was error to admit the bond hearing testimony under 725 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/115-10.4 because the issues at the bond hearing differed significantly from the issues at trial and counsel did not have a similar motive for cross-examining the witness at the hearing.
|
|||||
| Rodriquez v. Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Regulation, No. 1-05-1717,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, SIXTH DIVISION, June 22, 2007, Decided, June 22, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because § 2105-150 of Illinois Department of Professional Regulation Law expressly made § 2105-105 of Department Law inapplicable to proceedings under § 22 of Illinois Medical Malpractice Act of 1987 against doctor, Department had only subpoena powers in § 38 of Act, which did not authorize subpoenas for discovery depositions sought by doctor.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
