Skip to main content

Finley v. Mercer County

Citations

  • 526 N.E.2d 635
  • 172 Ill. App. 3d 30
  • 122 Ill. Dec. 376
  • 1988 Ill. App. LEXIS 1033

How courts have described this case

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

  • to obtain a judgment against the county, the plaintiffs had to prove that the county had constructive notice of the allegedly twisted sign
  • the plaintiffs could not establish for the purpose of avoiding summary judgment that the defect existed for a sufficient time to charge the county with constructive notice of the defect because the plaintiffs’ testimony undercut the basic theory of their case
  • the plaintiffs could not establish for the purpose of avoiding summary judgment that the defect existed for a sufficient time to charge the county with constructive notice of the defect because the plaintiffs’ testimony undercut the basic theory of their case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Heiple, Scott

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.