Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Appellate Court of Illinois· 7/11/2003

DiCosola v. Bowman

Citations

  • 794 N.E.2d 875
  • 342 Ill. App. 3d 530
  • 276 Ill. Dec. 625
  • 2003 Ill. App. LEXIS 885

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that the admissibility of photographs normally rests within the sound discretion of the circuit court
  • stating that the admissibility of photographs normally rests within the sound discretion of the circuit court
  • “[W]e are rejecting a bright-line rule ... We do not hold that expert testimony must always be required for such photographic evidence to be admissible.”
  • unclear whether expert's deposition transcript was used at trial as a matter of convenience or necessity
  • unclear whether expert’s deposition transcript was used at trial as a matter of convenience or necessity
  • in determining whether there has been an abuse of discretion, this court does not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court, or even determine whether the trial court exercised its discretion wisely

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gallagher, Frossard, O'Brien

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

32 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named DiCosola v. Bowman

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.