 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Napleton v. Vill. of Hinsdale, No. 2-06-0390,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A suit facially challenging a city's amending its zoning code to increase tax revenues in certain business districts was properly dismissed under 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/2--615 (2004) because the trial court correctly applied rational basis scrutiny, rather than intermediate scrutiny, to a zoning enactment not involving fundamental rights.
|
|||||
| Nedzvekas v. Fung, No. 1-06-0479,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, SECOND DIVISION, June 26, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although trial court properly barred some of patient's expert witnesses from testifying as a sanction pursuant to Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 219 for failing to comply with discovery deadlines, it should not have granted the foot doctor's summary judgment motion in her medical negligence, as her treating physician could still testify as to standard of care.
|
|||||
| People v. Bailey, No. 1-05-2913,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, SECOND DIVISION, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was convicted of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver under 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 570/401, retrial was warranted because counsel was ineffective in eliciting damaging testimony not presented as part of the State's case involving defendant's contact with a man yelling the word "rocks" on a corner.
|
|||||
| People v. Coners, No. 3-05-0821,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court abused its discretion in attributing delay period to State and dismissing a DUI charge for a violation of the right to speedy trial under 725 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/103-5(b) because defendant was charged with the time naturally associated with the filing of a motion to suppress, especially since the matter was continued on her motion.
|
|||||
| People v. Duff, No. 1-05-2110,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, SECOND DIVISION, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction was affirmed because, while the admission of the testimony of a witness regarding an accomplice's guilty plea violated the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt as, even without the testimony, a police officer's testimony was sufficient to support the conviction.
|
|||||
| People v. Saxon, No. 3-05-0292,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions for first-degree murder, arson, and concealment of homicidal death were supported by sufficient evidence because the evidence could have led the jury to believe that defendant had performed anal intercourse on the victim and that, to cover up his crime, he murdered her and burned her body inside a garage.
|
|||||
| Surestaff, Inc. v. Azteca Foods, Inc., No. 1-06-1994,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, SECOND DIVISION, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly instructed jury that an agreement by which employment agency agreed to pay workers' compensation benefits to injured workers loaned to borrowing employer was "agreement to the contrary" under 820 Ill. Comp. Stat. 305/1(a)(4) because reference to the statute was not required for purposes of an "agreement to the contrary."
|
|||||
| People v. Thomas, No. 2-05-0569,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, June 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant was properly convicted of burglary in violation of 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/19--1(a), his theft conviction arising from the same incident, which involved items stolen from the restricted employee area of a public building during business hours, was vacated because theft was a lesser-included offense of burglary.
|
|||||
| Quality Saw And Seal, Inc. v. Ill. Commerce Comm'n, No. 2-06-0637,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, June 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Contractor's saw-cutting of concrete pavement was "excavation" under 220 Ill. Comp. Stat. 50/2.3 that required prior notice to utility companies under 220 Ill. Comp. Stat. 50/4(d) of the Illinois Underground Utility Facilities Damage Prevention Act; there was sufficient evidence that the contractor's failure to give notice was willful.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
