Commonwealth Edison Co. v. COMMERCE COM'N

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that “[t]he law-of-the-case doctrine binds a court only where a court’s prior order was final” and declining to treat transferor court’s jurisdictional ruling as binding on transferee court
• stating that the denial of a motion to dismiss is an interlocutory order which “may be modified or revised by a successor court at any time prior to final judgment”
• \Cermak Health Services instructs further that the legislative enactment will be struck down where it ‘\unduly infringe[s] upon [our supreme court’s] constitutional rule-making authority\’\
• \An interlocutory order is one that does not dispose of all of the controversy between the parties.\
• “Cermak Health Services teaches that where the legislature expressly exercises its authority to promulgate those rules, it may preempt a supreme court rule addressing the same subject.”
• “Because the legislature did not express an intent to exercise its power to promulgate a rule preempting Rule 303(a)(1)’s ‘last pending post-judgment motion’ provision, Rule 303(a) is applicable here.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).