 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| DOT v. Lowderman, LLC, No. 3-05-0128,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT, August 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in finding 605 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/4-210 restricted property owner's property from being landlocked as a matter of law, but because property owner retained an indirect right of access, trial court correctly ruled that a jury could determine damages resulting from state transportation agency's extinguishment of access rights.
|
|||||
| People v. Kucavik, No. 3-05-0809,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, THIRD DISTRICT, August 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In action charging defendant with DUI, trial court erred in refusing to instruct jury on defense of necessity because jury could have found defendant reasonably believed simply activating flashing lights or pulling car to side of road was insufficient to avoid greater injury than driving to side street after car was abandoned in middle of street.
|
|||||
| People v. Tate, No. 2-04-0968,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, SECOND DISTRICT, August 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Officers did not have a reasonable belief based on specific and articulable facts that defendant posed a danger or was involved in criminal activity. Accordingly, the trial court properly determined that defendant's seizure was not justified under the Fourth Amendment and properly granted defendant's motion to suppress.
|
|||||
| Thompson v. Northeast Ill. Reg'l Commuter R.R. Corp., No. 1-04-3147,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIFTH DIVISION, August 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a suit by a driver whose car was hit by a train, the trial court properly granted summary judgment to the railroad company on the driver's negligent entrustment claim. The claim was preempted by the Federal Railroad Safety Act; moreover, the claim was duplicative of the driver's negligence claim, which was based on respondeat superior.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
