Michael Evans v. Anthony Katalinic, Fred Hill, William Mosher

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that under Illinois law, vacated convictions did not constitute final judgments
• describing defendants’ two arguments as, respectively, “absurd,” and “too ridiculous to merit comment”
• declining to give preclusive effect to the denial of a motion to suppress in a decades-later post-exoneration § 1983 lawsuit, where a witness revealed in a deposition that police pressured her to make an identification
• \This is an absurd argument ... not only were both convictions ... vacated ... leaving precious little upon which preclusion could be based.\
• “This is an absurd argument . . . not only were both convictions . . . vacated . . . leaving precious little upon which preclusion could be based.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).