|
| |
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.
|
| |
State Courts -
Illinois - November 14 - November 20, 2007
|
| |
In re Marriage of Nesbitt, No. 1-05-3972, 1-06-0108, 1-06-0531, 1-06-1665, Consol.,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, THIRD DIVISION, November 14, 2007, Decided, November 14, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Cardona v. Del Granado, Nos. 1-07-0942 and 1-07-0943, Consolidated,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIRST DIVISION, November 19, 2007, Decided, November 19, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Filing of timely post-trial motion challenging trial court's judgment in medical malpractice action provided trial court with subject matter jurisdiction to order new trial on all issues. Record was inadequate for appellate court to determine whether reasonable basis existed for jury's verdict; thus, order of new trial was not abuse of discretion.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Miller v. Lockport Realty Group, Inc., No. 1-06-3603,
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIRST DIVISION, November 19, 2007, Decided, November 19, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Realty company was properly granted summary judgment on claim for tortious interference with prospective business advantage where attorney was not surprised by assertion of privilege of competition, and realty company's actions fell with the privilege of competition, as it lawfully competed with attorney over property in an open real estate market.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
