Court Filings
11 filings indexedRecent court opinions cross-linked with public notices by case number, summarized and classified by AI.
United Equitable Insurance Co. v. Steward
The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the Cook County circuit court’s dismissal with prejudice of United Equitable Insurance Company’s 2022 declaratory judgment complaint. UEIC sought a declaration it owed no coverage beyond a $25,000 policy limit and that it breached no duties to its insured; Walker moved to dismiss arguing res judicata and lack of an actual controversy. The court held the policy limit was undisputed and that UEIC improperly sought retrospective clearance from liability for alleged past bad-faith conduct—matters properly litigated in Walker’s separate bad-faith lawsuit—so there was no justiciable controversy for a declaratory judgment.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Court of Illinois1-25-0978In re K.W.
The appellate court upheld the trial court’s finding that 11-year-old K.W. was neglected by his sole custodial parent, M.W., because K.W. suffered physical injuries (including a black eye) while in M.W.’s care and was exposed to an injurious home environment. The court also affirmed the dispositional order making K.W. a ward of the court and setting a 12‑month reunification goal, based largely on M.W.’s refusal to complete a court‑ordered substance abuse assessment despite admissions of recent drinking and past substance abuse and his failure to obtain timely physical and mental health care for K.W. The court credited school and DCFS testimony and found the rulings were not against the manifest weight of the evidence.
FamilyAffirmedAppellate Court of Illinois1-25-0872People v. Andrews
The Illinois Fifth District Appellate Court affirmed Bryce Andrews’ convictions and sentence for the murders of his father and stepfather. Andrews challenged the trial court’s order requiring him to submit to a psychological examination by the State’s expert before a suppression hearing on whether his February 5, 2021 statements were voluntary. The court held the order was proper under 725 ILCS 5/115-6 because the facts and circumstances gave reasonable ground to believe a mental-status defense might be raised, and alternatively the court had inherent authority to manage evidentiary presentation. The court also found no prejudice from the examination.
Criminal AppealAffirmedAppellate Court of Illinois5-25-0290In re Mo.J.
The Appellate Court affirmed the Cook County circuit court’s termination of T.M.’s parental rights to her four children. The mother argued her right to counsel and due process were violated when her attorney’s late motion to withdraw was granted two days before trial and the court required her to proceed that day with the withdrawing lawyer acting as standby counsel. The court found the withdrawal violated Rule 13 but held there was no due process violation because standby counsel actively represented the mother, the mother had a history of noncooperation with counsel, and delay would have harmed the children. The court also found sufficient evidence that terminating parental rights served the children’s best interests given their stable placements, bond with caregivers, and wishes to be adopted.
FamilyAffirmedAppellate Court of Illinois1-25-1573Guerrero v. Parker
The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the trial court's order ordering the Will County Clerk to place Cesar Guerrero on the April 1, 2025 consolidated election ballot as the Democratic nominee for Joliet Township Supervisor. The Board of Elections had listed Guerrero on a ballot-forfeiture list because his campaign committee owed civil penalties, and the County Clerk removed his name. Guerrero paid the fines on January 29, 2025, was renominated to fill the vacancy in early February, and the court held that the Election Code did not bar ballot placement once the penalties were paid and that the vacancy-filling complied with timing rules. The court also affirmed summary judgment for the County Clerk on Guerrero’s statutory civil-rights claim because the record lacked evidence of willful and wanton conduct.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Court of Illinois3-25-0284Berman v. Napleton Schaumburg Inc
The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s denial of the dealership’s motion to dismiss and compel arbitration. Plaintiff Berman sued Napleton for charging and not providing a rust- and stain-prevention product and signed two separate arbitration agreements during purchase: the Retail Installment Contract (RIC) and a Dispute Resolution Agreement (DRA). The court held the two agreements contain irreconcilable, material conflicts—about the arbitration forum, who decides whether a dispute is arbitrable, and allocation of arbitration fees—so no enforceable arbitration agreement exists as to Napleton’s effort to compel arbitration.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Court of Illinois1-25-1825People v. Watts
The Illinois Fourth District Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s denial of Charles F. Watts’s postconviction petition after a third-stage evidentiary hearing. Watts argued he made a substantial showing of actual innocence, that trial counsel was ineffective for not calling an alibi witness (Terrance Linear), and that postconviction counsel failed to comply with Rule 651(c). The court held the petition was decided after a third-stage hearing, rejected the actual-innocence claim as forfeited for lack of a proper third-stage argument, found no Strickland error because counsel’s choice not to call Linear could be strategic in light of surveillance video, and determined Rule 651(c) claims about second-stage pleading are moot once a claim receives a full evidentiary hearing.
Criminal AppealAffirmedAppellate Court of Illinois4-25-0533Colatorti v. Republican Legislative Committee for the Twenty-Sixth Legislative District
The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the dismissal with prejudice of Brittany Colatorti’s amended complaint seeking a declaration that Darby Hills’s appointment to a vacant state senate seat was invalid. Colatorti argued the committee failed to give statutorily required notice and that Hills was not a member of the Republican Party at relevant times. The court held the statute requires only that the appointee be a member of the party at the time of appointment; Hills became a precinct committeeperson before her February 28, 2025 appointment and therefore qualified. The complaint was legally insufficient and properly dismissed.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Court of Illinois2-25-0230Neighbors Against A Marijuana Dispensary, INC v. Zoning Board
The appellate court affirmed the Cook County circuit court’s dismissal of Neighbors Against a Marijuana Dispensary (NAMD)’s administrative-review complaint challenging the Chicago Zoning Board of Appeals’ grant of a special use permit to MariGrow to operate a cannabis dispensary. The court held NAMD lacked statutory standing because it failed to show any member owned property within 250 feet, had not entered an appearance and objected at the Board hearing, and the membership evidence NAMD sought to add was outside the administrative record. The court also found no due-process or equal-protection violation and upheld denial of NAMD’s untimely motion to amend.
CivilAffirmedAppellate Court of Illinois1-24-1910People v. Moon
A jury in McLean County convicted Kevon Moon of first-degree murder, attempted murder, and obstructing justice based on circumstantial evidence tying him and co-defendant James to firearms and conduct surrounding an October 12, 2020 shooting. On appeal Moon argued (1) ineffective assistance for not objecting when the State impeached its own witness with prior recorded inconsistent statements, (2) that a video showing him rapping and dancing with a firearm was unduly prejudicial, and (3) it was error to allow a lead detective to sit at the State’s counsel table. The appellate court affirmed, finding the recorded statements were admissible as substantive evidence, the video was relevant and not unfairly prejudicial, and the court properly exercised its discretion to permit the detective at counsel table.
Criminal AppealAffirmedAppellate Court of Illinois4-25-0352Kenwood-Oakland Community Org. v. IL Department of Human Services
The appellate court affirmed the Illinois Department of Human Services’ decision requiring Kenwood-Oakland Community Organization (KOCO) to repay $451,198 in grant funds. KOCO had challenged IDHS’s recovery determination after administrative and circuit-court review, arguing it properly spent the grants and that IDHS denied due process and changed its basis for recovery. The court held KOCO failed to rebut the statutory presumption favoring recovery because it did not produce adequate accounting records—most critically, KOCO refused to provide its general ledger—so IDHS permissibly sought recovery under the Grant Funds Recovery Act and related regulations.
AdministrativeAffirmedAppellate Court of Illinois1-24-1238