Illinois Supreme and Appellate Court Case Summaries
This page contains the current month's
summaries, the most recent summaries provided first.
Click on the case-name link to go directly to the full-text opinion.
Case-name link in your browser's LINK COLOR.
Corrected or modified opinions noted by PURPLE headings.
For the previous six months' summaries or to return to the Illinois Court Reports Home Page, click on the link below:
No. 2013 IL App (2nd) 110598 People
v. Gardner Filed 1-29-13 (LJD)
Defendant, Michael C. Gardner, was found guilty of home invasion (720 ILCS 5/12-11(a)(2) (West 2006)), after a jury trial. He was sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment. Defendant filed a direct appeal, arguing that the trial court failed to comply with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 431(b) (eff. May 1, 2007). This court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. People v. Gardner, No. 2- 09-0429 (2010) (unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23). Defendant filed a pro se postconviction petition on March 2, 2011, pursuant to the Post-Conviction Hearing Act (Act) (725 ILCS 5/122-1 et seq. (West 2010)). The trial court dismissed the petition as frivolous and patently without merit. Defendant appeals, arguing that his petition was improperly dismissed at the first stage where it contained the gist of a constitutional claim, specifically that counsel failed to call a witness to refute the victim’s injuries, a necessary element of home invasion. According to defendant, had the witness been called to refute the injury evidence, he would have been guilty of only the lesser included offense of criminal trespass to a residence. We affirm.
No. 2013 IL App (2nd) 111146 In
re Marriage of Sobieski Filed 1-29-13 (LJD)
Respondent, Jon Sobieski, appeals from the judgment of the Du Page County circuit court dissolving his marriage to petitioner, Therese Sobieski, and from the order denying his motion to reconsider. Specifically, Jon contends that the trial court erred in ordering him to pay $43,180.50 of Therese’s attorney fees and also erred in setting his monthly child support at $4,800. For the reasons set forth herein, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
No. 2013 IL App (4th) 110825 The
Department of Central Management Services v. The Illinois Labor
Relations Board Filed 1-28-13 (LJD)
Petitioner, the Department of Central Management Services (CMS), the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), brings this action for direct review of a decision by the Illinois Labor Relations Board, State Panel (Board), granting the majority interest petition brought by the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 150 (Union) to represent certain IDOT employees. The Board, adopting the administrative law judge's (ALJ) findings, concluded the field technicians and one technical manager were not supervisors within the meaning of section 3(r) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (Act) (5 ILCS 315/3(r) (West 2010)) and thus were eligible for inclusion in the collective-bargaining unit. On appeal, petitioner argues the Board's certification of representation was against the manifest weight of the evidence, clearly erroneous, and/or contrary to law because the petitioned-for employees are supervisory employees under the Act. We reverse.
Lake Holiday is a
private lake community in La Salle County. The plaintiff has owned
property in the development since 1994 and is a member of the Lake
Holiday Property Owners Association, an Illinois not-for-profit
corporation. The association has traffic rules, including rules against
speeding. It provides for fines, and maintains a security department.
On October 20, 2008, plaintiff was on a road on the private grounds
when he was stopped for speeding by a security officer and received a
citation. He responded by filing a suit in circuit court raising
numerous issues, on all of which the trial court awarded summary
judgment in favor of the defendant association, its board of directors,
and its security chief.
This action to recover
damages for the tort of intentional interference with a testamentary
expectancy was filed in the circuit court of Cook County. The decedent,
Frank Dama, died in 2009. Plaintiff Colleen Bjork had been a hospice
worker for decedent’s late wife, while the defendant, Frank O’Meara,
had been the decedent’s dentist. Neither is related to decedent.
The decedent had taken initial steps, in 2005, to set the plaintiff up
as a pay-on-death beneficiary of one of his bank accounts, which was
worth over half a million dollars. Plaintiff had signed papers with the
decedent’s personal banker concerning this. After his demise, that bank
informed plaintiff that she was not a beneficiary of any of decedent’s
accounts with it. After the will was admitted to probate, O’Meara was
appointed as the independent representative of the estate. The will
contained a general residuary clause leaving the entire estate to
O’Meara and his wife. Plaintiff was not a beneficiary. In the probate
proceeding, plaintiff tried to find out what had happened. Pursuant to
a citation for discovery, the bank produced some documents, but
plaintiff alleged she needed more information. She filed a petition to
depose the decedent’s personal banker, with whom she had dealt in the
setting up of the pay-on-death beneficiary account, but her request was
denied. The estate assets were distributed, the estate was closed, and
plaintiff filed this lawsuit. It was dismissed as not having been filed
within the period for filing will contests, and the appellate court
A three-year-old girl died in Kewanee
in 1995. She was the daughter of this defendant’s live-in girlfriend.
Autopsy results showed massive head injuries and evidence of
suffocation. The defendant’s pretrial statements initially indicated
that he came into the child’s bedroom and found her lifeless, but he
also later admitted hitting her. He did not testify at his 1996 Henry
County jury trial, at which a knowing murder charge was dismissed by
the State. This left only the charges of aggravated battery of a child
and felony murder. The defendant objected that proceeding in this
manner removed the possibility of an involuntary manslaughter
instruction, but he was overruled. The jury found guilt of felony
murder and aggravated battery of a child. Mandatory natural-life
imprisonment was the sentence. The conviction was affirmed by the
appellate court on direct appeal in 2000, but the cause was remanded
for resentencing, and a 50-year term was later imposed.
Following two trials and several appeals, the Supreme Court ruled that the State failed to prove that the infant's death resulted from defendant's criminal agency. Following her death from cancer, plaintiff was appointed executor to recover Winnebago County's expense of medical of the defendant. Sharon Rudy filed a petition in Cook County circuit court seeking to obtain a certificate of innocence in order for defendant's estate to pursue a claim for damages in the Court of Claims for defendant's alleged wrongful conviction and imprisonment pursuant to section 2-702 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-702 (West 2008)). The trial court denied the petition, and thereafter, denied a motion to reconsider. Sharon Rudy now appeals on behalf of defendant's estate. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
No. 2013 IL App (4th) 111042 People
v. Maxwell Filed 1-23-13 (LJD)
In May 2011, defendant, Ruth A. Maxwell, pleaded guilty to one count of driving under the influence (DUI). In July 2011, the Champaign County circuit court sentenced defendant to 180 days in the county jail and 18 months' conditional discharge. Thereafter, defendant filed a second motion to withdraw her guilty plea and an emergency motion to reconsider her sentence. In October 2011, the court denied the two motions without a hearing. Defendant appeals, asserting the trial court erred by denying her second motion to withdraw her guilty plea and her emergency motion to reconsider her sentence without a hearing. We reverse the denial of defendant's motion to withdraw her guilty plea and remand with directions.
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 113751 In
re Marriage of Callahan Filed 1-23-13 (LJD)
The marriage between petitioner-appellant Michael Callahan and respondent-appellee Rosemary Callahan was dissolved on September 10, 2008, in a judgment of dissolution that incorporated the parties' marital settlement agreement (MAS). Two years later, respondent filed a motion to vacate the judgment of dissolution under section 2-1401 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-1401 (West 2010)), alleging that the MSA was unconscionable and that: (1) petitioner fraudulently induced her to sign the MSA by misrepresenting its contents; and (2) petitioner's counsel ade misrepresentations of fact and law during the prove-up hearing. Petitioner appeals from the order of the circuit court granting respondent's motion for summary judgment on count II of the petition to vacate. Petitioner argues that the court erred in granting summary judgment when there was no evidence of respondent's due diligence in bringing the motion and where he was not permitted to depose respondent. For the following reasons, we affirm.
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 120891
v. Beck Filed 1-22-13 (RJC)
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 112472 People v. Riley Filed 1-22-13 (RJC)
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 121843 Klehr
v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Company Filed
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 121147 NAB
Bank v. LaSalle Bank, N.A. Filed 1-22-13 (RJC)
No. 2013 IL App (5th) 110530 Fairfield
National Bank v. Chansler Filed 1-22-13
No. 2013 IL App (2d) 110805 People
v. Hommerson Filed 1-18-13 (TJJ)
The defendant, Peter Hommerson, filed a pro se postconviction petition, alleging that trial counsel was ineffective at his trial, at which he was found guilty of the first-degree murders of Marvin and Kay Lichtman. The defendant argued, inter alia, that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to impeach prosecution witnesses, investigate and call other witnesses whose testimony would have refuted the State’s witnesses’ claims, present exculpatory evidence, challenge a search warrant, and move to dismiss the charges on speedy trial grounds. The defendant also cited counsel’s failure to report prosecutorial misconduct and alleged that both defense counsel and the prosecutor withheld evidence that would have established his innocence. Relying on this court’s opinion in People v. Carr, 407 Ill. App. 3d 513, 515 (2011), the trial court summarily dismissed the petition solely because the petition lacked a valid, notarized affidavit attesting to the veracity of its contents, as required by section 122-1(b) of the Post-Conviction Hearing Act (Act) (725 ILCS 5/122-1(b) (West 2010)). The defendant now appeals the dismissal of his pro se postconviction petition, contending that in light of this court’s recent opinion in People v. Turner, 2012 IL App (2d) 100819, which was published after Carr, the lack of a notarized section 122-1(b) affidavit is an inappropriate basis for a first-stage dismissal of a postconviction petition and therefore the trial court erred in dismissing his petition solely on this basis. The State urges us to adhere to our decision in Carr and to affirm the dismissal of the defendant’s petition. We agree with the State and therefore affirm the trial court’s decision.
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 101476 People
v. Almodovar Filed 1-18-13 (TJJ)
Defendant was charged with involvement in a 1994 drive-by shooting, due in part to the investigative efforts of Detective Reynaldo Guevara. Following trial, defendant was found guilty of first degree murder, attempted murder, and aggravated battery with a firearm, and he was sentenced to a term of natural life in prison. In 1998, defendant filed his first petition for postconviction relief, contending that the prosecution had failed to produce material evidence that would have exculpated him, in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). In particular, defendant alleged that the prosecution failed to disclose that key prosecution witnesses Jackueline Grande and Kennelly Saez, who identified defendant in a lineup and at trial, had been shown a photograph of the defendant by Detective Guevara shortly before they viewed the lineup. After a hearing, the circuit court denied the petition. In 2010, defendant filed a pro se motion for leave to file a successive postconviction petition. This motion is the subject of the instant appeal. In this motion, defendant alleged that newly discovered evidence supported his Brady claim, namely, evidence that Detective Guevara was involved in a pattern of flagrant misconduct whereby he manipulated witnesses to falsely identify individuals in multiple other cases. The circuit court denied defendant’s motion, and defendant now appeals. For the reasons that follow, we reverse and remand.
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 103016 Lojek
v. Illinois Department of Employment Security Filed 1-18-13
After plaintiff Dorota Lojek's employment with defendant ABM Janitorial Services (ABM) ended after 22 years on the job, she applied to the Illinois Department of Employment Security (IDES) for unemployment insurance benefits pursuant to the Illinois Unemployment Insurance Act (the Act) (820 ILCS 405/100 et seq. (West 2010)). The claims adjudicator determined that plaintiff was ineligible for benefits. Plaintiff appealed the adjudicator's decision to a hearing referee. The hearing referee held a telephone hearing, during which he heard the testimony of plaintiff's supervisor and the testimony of plaintiff, who required the assistance of an interpreter. The hearing referee determined that plaintiff voluntarily terminated her employment with ABM and was therefore ineligible for unemployment insurance benefits. 820 ILCS 405/601(A) (West 2010). The IDES Board of Review (the Board) affirmed the hearing referee's decision. Plaintiff filed a complaint for administrative review in the trial court, and the trial court reversed the decision of the Board. IDES appealed the trial court's order, and, for the following reasons, we reverse the order of the trial court and reinstate the Board's decision.
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 111596 Fenton v. The City of
Chicago Filed 1-17-13 (TJJ)
In this appeal, we are asked to consider whether a jury rightly held the City of Chicago liable for the actions of two of its police officers. Those officers twice responded to the 911 calls of Henry Fenton related to a violent argument, only to remove the agitator, Rovale Brim, from the premises in zero-degree weather in the middle of the night, with instructions to wait outside for at least an hour before his girlfriend would give him a ride to another location. Only minutes after the officers left him on the sidewalk, a block from the scene, Rovale returned home where he beat and stabbed Fenton, his mother's boyfriend, leading to Fenton's death. After a lengthy jury trial, which notably included an expert witness who testified critically about the conduct of the officers, the jury returned a verdict in excess of $2 million. The jury's verdict also included answers to special interrogatories which substantiated its finding that the involved officers acted wilfully and wantonly in their official activities.
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 120402 American
Zurich Insurance Company v. Wilcox and Christopoulos, L.L.C.
Filed 1-17-13 (TJJ)
This cause arises out of a declaratory judgment action filed by the plaintiff-appellant, American Zurich Insurance Co., against the defendant-appellee, the law firm of Wilcox & Christopoulos, L.L.C., and the defendant, Mark Wilcox, wherein American Zurich sought a declaration that it was not obligated to defend Wilcox or the Wilcox law firm in an underlying claim for civil conspiracy brought by Michael Demnicki against, inter alia, Wilcox and the firm. The underlying claim alleges inter alia, that Wilcox and the Wilcox law firm were involved in a civil conspiracy to open and operate a restaurant/lounge by illegal means. Because at all relevant times the Wilcox law firm had a lawyers professional liability insurance policy with American Zurich, it tendered the defense of the underlying claim to American Zurich. However, American Zurich denied coverage and refused to defend or indemnify either Wilcox or the law firm against any action by Demnicki. After discovery, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment seeking a declaration regarding American Zurich's duty to defend Wilcox and the firm. The circuit court held that American Zurich had a duty to defend the Wilcox law firm but no duty to defend Wilcox individually. The court therefore granted American Zurich's motion for summary judgement as to Wilcox but denied the motion as to the Wilcox firm. For the reasons that follow, we reverse.
No. 2013 IL App (2nd) 120651 Stoelting v. Betzelos Filed 1-17-13 (LJD)
At issue in this appeal is whether the dismissal of the medical malpractice complaint that plaintiff, Cameron Stoelting, filed against defendant, Steven J. Betzelos, was properly dismissed with prejudice when plaintiff’s attorney failed to file an attorney affidavit as required by section 2-622 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-622 (West 1994))1 and the court believed that it had no discretion to grant plaintiff additional time to file the necessary document. For the reasons that follow, we determine that dismissal with prejudice was improper. Accordingly, we reverse and remand.
No. 2013 IL App (2nd) 110524 People v. Roberts Filed 1-17-13 (LJD)
Following a jury trial in the circuit court of McHenry County,
defendant, Brett A. Roberts, was found guilty of residential burglary
(720 ILCS 5/19-3(a) (West 2010)) and was sentenced to a 10-year prison
term. Defendant argues on appeal that he is guilty only of burglary,
not residential burglary. At issue is whether a vacant house is a
“dwelling” within the meaning of the residential burglary statute,
where the owners had placed the property for sale but had secured no
purchaser and had moved out of the state with no plans to return to the
house. We hold that such a house is not a dwelling in the pertinent
sense and we therefore reduce defendant’s conviction to burglary.
No. 2013 IL App (2nd) 120099 In
re Marriage of Tomlins Filed 1-17-13 (LJD)
The petitioner, Margaret Tomlins, filed a petition for dissolution
of her marriage to the respondent, Christopher Glenn. After a hearing
on grounds for dissolution, the circuit court entered a bifurcated
judgment, which dissolved the marriage and reserved other issues for
future resolution. On appeal, Christopher argues, inter alia, that the
court erred when it found that grounds existed to justify the
dissolution of his marriage to Margaret and when it entered the
bifurcated judgment. We affirm.
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 120645 Gagnon
v. Schickel Filed 1-11-13 (LJD)
The plaintiff, Michael Gagnon, appeals from the trial court's judgment finding in favor of the appellee, Deborah Schickel, on several counts of his 15-count complaint against her and two other defendants, Michael Laird and Mark Iles, Jr.1, who are not parties to this appeal. On appeal, the plaintiff argues that the trial court erred in dismissing three of the counts of his complaint prior to trial and in finding in favor of Schickel on three additional counts following trial. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the trial court's dismissal of the first three counts of the plaintiff's complaint, but we reverse the trial court's rejection of three additional claims following a trial. We remand the cause with directions for the trial court to make further findings in accordance with the views expressed herein, and to order damages as appropriate.
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 113340 Ware
v. First Specialty Insurance Corporation Filed 1-11-13 (LJD)
At approximately 12:30 a.m. on June 29, 2003, a three-story porch located at the rear of the property at 713 West Wrightwood in Chicago, Illinois collapsed during a party, resulting in the deaths of 12 individuals and injuries to 29 more. Those individuals and their estates (collectively plaintiffs) ultimately settled their claims with the building owner and others (collectively defendants) in the underlying tort action and obtained an assignment of rights against appellant, First Specialty Insurance Corporation (First Specialty). Plaintiffs then filed this declaratory action against First Specialty, arguing that because the porch collapse constituted more than one occurrence, First Specialty was liable to them for the aggregate limit of the relevant insurance policy, $2 million, rather than the $1 million per occurrence limit that First Specialty had already paid. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of First Specialty and plaintiffs appealed.
No. 2013 IL App (4th) 110877 The
Department of Central Management Services v. The Illinois Labor
Relations Board Filed 1-11-13 (LJD)
In February 2010, respondent, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31 (AFSCME), filed a majority interest representation petition under the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (Act) (5 ILCS 315/1 to 27 (West 2010)) with the Illinois Labor Relations Board (Board), seeking to include attorney-assistant employees of the petitioner, the Department of Central Management Services (CMS), in AFSCME's existing RC- 10 bargaining unit. CMS appeals, arguing that the Board erred by (1) concluding that the disputed PSA 8s (1) were not managerial under the Act and (2) finding that employees who are exempt from the Illinois Personnel Code under section 4d(1) (20 ILCS 415/4d(1) (West 2010)) should be included in the bargaining unit. Because we agree with CMS that the Board's determination that the disputed PSA 8s were not managerial employees was clearly erroneous, we reverse.
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 111605 Resurrection
Home Health Services v. Shannon Filed 1-10-13 (TJJ)
We determine the circuit court erred in granting summary judgment for two reasons. First, the court erred as a matter of law in finding that Resurrection's wage structure was a "salary basis" of compensation under the applicable federal regulations incorporated by the Illinois Minimum Wage Law. Second, there is a genuine issue of material fact whether the work performed by Resurrection employees qualifies under the "fee basis" test in the federal regulations. Thus, granting summary judgment to Resurrection was inappropriate and we reverse and remand for further proceedings. Due to the existence of genuine issues of material fact, the denial of the Department's cross-motion for summary judgment was not erroneous and therefore we affirm that order denying the Department's motion. We also determine that the circuit court's order barring the Department's claims under the Illinois Minimum Wage Law as to certain employees who did not appear for deposition was an abuse of discretion, as there was no evidence the non-appearing witnesses failed to appear for their depositions at the instance of or in collusion with the Department. There also was no basis for the order where the Department had an independent right and duty to maintain an action under the Illinois Minimum Wage Law on behalf of the non-appearing employee witnesses.
No. 2013 IL App (1st) 112412 Klingelhoets
v. Charlton-Perrin Filed 1-10-13 (TJJ)
Plaintiff-appellee Gwen Klingelhoets (plaintiff) brought a negligence action against defendant-appellant Stacia Charlton-Perrin (defendant) arising from an automobile accident. Following a jury trial, the trial court entered judgment on the verdict in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the amount of $713,601.82. Defendant now appeals, contending that the trial court erred in allowing plaintiff to make "repeated and unfair attacks" in opening statement and closing argument, in not permitting defendant to call a certain witness, in denying her motions to bar two other witnesses, and in allowing the jury to hear testimony that plaintiff did not continue with treatment because of its cost. She also contends that the jury's verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence. Defendant asks that we reverse the judgment entered upon the jury verdict and remand with directions to grant a new trial or a remittitur. For the following reasons, we affirm.
No. 2013 IL App (5th) 110428 Schott
v. Halloran Construction Company, Inc. Filed 1-10-13 (TJJ)
We reject the plaintiffs' argument is that the portion of the retaining wall from which Lawrence stepped or fell was not damaged by rain and was not repaired or rebuilt in 1994. The portion of the wall from which Lawrence stepped or fell was the original retaining wall built by Halloran Construction in 1990, more than 10 years prior to the accident. We see no reason why an improvement to some portion of the property other than that on which the plaintiffs were injured should extend or renew the statute of repose with respect to their injuries. Accordingly, the plaintiffs' claim is barred by the 10-year statute of repose. Because the plaintiffs' action against the defendant is barred by the 10-year construction statute of repose, we reverse the judgment of the circuit court of St. Clair County denying the defendant's posttrial motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
No. 2013 IL App (4th) 120068 In
re: the Detention of Hunter Filed 1-9-13 (TJJ)
Respondent, Anthony L. Hunter, was charged with aggravated criminal sexual assault and criminal sexual assault. While those criminal charges were pending, the State instituted a civil commitment proceeding, pursuant to Illinois's Sexually Dangerous Persons Act. After a jury trial, the circuit court declared respondent a sexually dangerous person and ordered his commitment. Respondent's posttrial motion was denied, and he appealed. Respondent argues his commitment as a sexually dangerous person should be reversed because (1) the Act is unconstitutional, on its face and as applied, as violative of the confrontational clause, or in the alternative, (2) the State's evidence was insufficient to satisfy the demonstrated-propensities requirement of the Act. We find no constitutional violation and affirm.
No. 2013 IL App (3d) 110152 People
v. Escareno Filed 1-8-13 (TJJ)
Defendant, Enrique G. Escareno, was convicted of two counts of aggravated criminal sexual abuse and sentenced to two concurrent terms of eight years' imprisonment. Defendant appeals, arguing that: (1) the evidence was not sufficient to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; and (2) he was deprived of his constitutional right to present a defense when the trial court denied his motion to subpoena records without first conducting an in camera review of the records. We find the evidence was sufficient to convict defendant but remand the cause for an in camera review of the records requested in defendant's subpoena.
No. 2013 IL App (4th) 120419 The
Board of Education of Schaumburg Community Consolidated School District
No. 54 v. The Teachers' Retirement System of the State of Illinois
Filed 1-7-13 (TJJ)
On October 28, 2011, the Board of Trustees for the Teachers' Retirement System of the State of Illinois voted to uphold the recommended decision of TRS's claims hearing committee. In re Schaumburg Community Consolidated School District No. 54, The Board of Trustees of the Teachers' Retirement System. The Committee recommended denying the Board of Education of Schaumburg Community Consolidated School District No. 54's request for an exemption from an assessment issued pursuant to section 16-158(f) of the Illinois Pension Code against the District because the District provided some of its administrators raises in excess of 6% in the years preceding their retirements pursuant to the District's voluntary retirement program (Retirement Program). In April 2012, the circuit court denied the District’s request for administrative review. The District appeals, arguing TRS’s interpretation of section 16-158(g) of the Pension Code and sections 1650.483 and 1650.484 of title 80 of the Illinois Administrative Code is contrary to law and the plain language of its own regulations. We affirm the circuit court's affirmance of TRS’s decision.
No. 2012 IL App (4th) 120419 The
Secretary of State v. The Illinois Labor Relations Board
Filed 11-29-12 (TJJ)
The Secretary of State seeks review of a final decision and order of the Illinois Labor Relations Board, State Panel, certifying Service Employees International Union, Local 73, as the exclusive bargaining representative of "approximately 116" individuals employed by the Secretary. The Secretary contends (1) the Board lacked jurisdiction to address the Union's representation petition, and (2) the Board's determinations (a) the individuals were not supervisors under section 3(r) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act and (b) were not managers under section 3(j) of the Labor Act were clearly erroneous. We affirm.
No. 2013 IL App (2d) 110663 People
v. DeSomer Filed 1-3-13 (TJJ)
Following a bench trial, defendant, Dirk W. DeSomer, was convicted of domestic battery and resisting a peace officer. Defendant appeals, contending that the trial court erred by admitting under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule a statement by defendant’s girlfriend, the alleged victim, that defendant was beating her. We affirm.
No. 2012 IL App (1st) 112812 Koulogeorge
v. Campbell Filed 12-31-12 (TJJ)
Plaintiffs-appellants, Charles R. Walgreen III, Leslie Ann Walgreen Pratt, and James Alan Walgreen (hereinafter, the Walgreen Beneficiaries), the children of the late Charles R. Walgreen, Jr., appeal from the circuit court orders denying their cross-motion for summary judgment and granting summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees, Rotary/One Foundation, Inc., and the Rotary Foundation of Rotary International (hereinafter, collectively referred to as the Rotary Foundations). The center of the dispute concerns the proceeds of Walgreen’s living trust. The Walgreen Beneficiaries contend the trial court erred in failing to examine evidence showing that the late Charles R. Walgreen intended to, and did in fact, adeem or revoke his bequest to the Rotary Foundations. They also contend the trial court erred in failing to consider the issue of attorney fees. For the reasons to follow, we affirm.
No. 2012 IL App (3d) 110660 In
re Marriage of Baecker Filed 12-31-12 (TJJ)
The petitioner, Garth Baecker, filed a petition for dissolution of marriage in the circuit court of Tazewell County on February 10, 2010. On June 10, 2010, Garth was convicted and sentenced to prison for attempting to kill the respondent, Terry Baecker. On March 23, 2011, the parties indicated that they had reached an agreement in the dissolution proceedings. The trial court read the terms of that oral agreement into the record and instructed counsel to prepare the final judgment. Garth, who was incarcerated in the Dixon Correctional Center throughout the course of this dissolution proceeding, refused to sign the prepared judgment incorporating the oral settlement. On April 19, 2011, Terry filed a motion to enforce the judgment and for entry of final judgment of dissolution. Shortly thereafter, on April 25, Garth filed a motion to vacate the oral settlement and set the matter for trial on all remaining issues. On June 7, 2011, the trial court heard the argument of the parties on their successive motions and entered a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, incorporating into the decree the oral settlement agreement over Garth's objection. Garth appeals, claiming, inter alia, that the trial court erred in denying his motion to vacate the oral settlement agreement of March 23, 2011, that the oral settlement agreement was not an enforceable contract for which there was a requisite "meeting of the minds," and that he was under duress and the victim of coercion at the time the settlement was reached. We affirm.
No. 2012 IL App (3d) 110926 Thompson
v. Policemen's Benevolent Labor Committee Filed 12-231-12
Plaintiff John Thompson, sheriff of Bureau County, filed a declaratory judgment action against defendants, Policemen’s Benevolent Labor Committee (PBLC), Dawn M. Dove and the County of Bureau, seeking a declaration that he was not required to arbitrate a decision by the Bureau County Merit Commission to discharge Dove. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants. We affirm.
No. 2012 IL App (3d) 110907WC Dye
v. Illinois Workers' Compensation Comm'n Filed 12-31-12 (TJJ)
Claimant, Linda Dye, filed an application for adjustment of claim pursuant to the Workers’ Compensation Act seeking benefits for injuries she allegedly sustained while in the employ of respondent, Plymouth Tube. Following a hearing pursuant to section 19(b) of the Act, the arbitrator determined that claimant’s current condition of ill-being is causally related to her employment. However, he denied her claim for prospective cosmetic medical care and her request that penalties, additional compensation, and attorney fees be assessed against respondent. The Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission (Commission) affirmed these findings, and the circuit court of La Salle County confirmed the decision of the Commission. On appeal, claimant insists that the Commission’s decision to deny authorization for prospective cosmetic medical care as well as its decision to deny the imposition of penalties, additional compensation, and attorney fees are against the manifest weight of the evidence. For the reasons which follow, we reverse the Commission’s denial of prospective cosmetic medical care, but affirm the denial of penalties, additional compensation, and attorney fees, and remand the matter for further proceedings in accordance with Thomas v. Industrial Comm’n, 78 Ill. 2d 327 (1980).