Dimeo v. Chicago Transit Authority

How courts have described this case

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

• “ ‘Notices missing even a single element are defective, as well as notices containing an incorrect element ***’ ”
• case dismissed for failing to include the time of the accident despite plaintiff's argument to disregard the \minimal\ defect in her notice in order to ensure a just result
• dismissal required where “time” element omitted despite plaintiffs claim that the “defect in her notice is so minimal that it should be disregarded in order to ensure a just result”
• case dismissed for failing to include the time of the accident despite plaintiffs argument to disregard the “minimal” defect in her notice in order to ensure a just result
• dismissal required where \time\ element omitted despite plain-tiff's claim that the \defect in her notice is so minimal that it should be disregarded in order to ensure a just result\
• the CTA's actual knowledge or ability to obtain information missing from a section 41 notice is irrelevant to the validity of the notice, as it is \solely the plaintiffs burden to comply with the section 41 notice requirements\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).