Duran v. TOWN OF CICERO, ILL.

How courts have described this case

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

• seizing video recording device at most interrupted process of creating evidence but; evidence was not destroyed
• upholding exclusion of evidence of misconduct complaints against officer in excessive-force case because introduction “risked creating a sideshow and sending the trial off track”
• appealing the denial of a Rule 59(e) motion and cross-appeals regarding evidence-spoilation and admittance
• noting that Illinois state law prohibits double recoveries
• “A judgment that can be read to allow a plaintiff to recover twice for the same injury contains a manifest error of law.”
• “a plaintiff may receive only one full compensation for his or her injuries, and double recovery for the same injury is not allowed” (cleaned up)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).