A member of our panel of leading appellate attorneys reviews the Illinois Supreme Court opinion handed down Thursday, August 26. 

Our panel of leading appellate attorneys reviews the four Illinois Supreme Court opinions handed down Thursday, June 17. In In re Application of Tax Deed, the court analyzed case-specific facts for purposes of determining whether section 22-85 of the Property Tax Code could be applied to void a tax deed. In Municipal Trust & Savings Bank v. Moriarty, the court construed section 2-202 of the Code of Civil Procedure to determine whether a private process server may serve process on a defendant in Cook County without first being appointed by the circuit court. In Roberts v. Alexandria Transportation, Inc., the court invoked its discretion and answered a question of law certified by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which asked “whether the obligation of a settling party is uncollectable pursuant to the Illinois Joint Tortfeasor Contribution Act.” In Walker v. Chasteen, the court addressed the constitutionality of section 15-1504.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as well as sections 7.30 and 7.31 of the Illinois Housing Development Act.

Our panel of leading appellate attorneys reviews the Illinois Supreme Court opinion handed down Wednesday, April 21. In Elam v. The Municipal Officers Electoral Board for the Village of Riverdale, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Municipal Officers Electoral Board for the Village of Riverdale invalidating a candidate’s eligibility to run for village trustee in the general election because of invalid signatures on his nominating petition.

Our panel of leading appellate attorneys reviews the two Illinois Supreme Court opinions handed down Thursday, March 18. In People v. Burge, the Supreme Court denied a defendant’s motion to withdraw her guilty plea after she asserted that it was involuntary because she was unaware she would lose her job if she pled guilty. In Ciolino v. Simon, a defamation case that arose from a documentary about an exoneration scandal, the Supreme Court considered whether the one-year window when the suit could be filed opened when the movie premiered at a publicized film festival.