Appellate Court of Illinois· 3/14/1991

People v. Hood

Citations

569 N.E.2d 228
210 Ill. App. 3d 743
155 Ill. Dec. 228
1991 Ill. App. LEXIS 360

How courts have described this case

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

observing this court “is not simply a depository into which the appealing party may dump the burden of argument and research”
this court “is entitled to have the issues clearly defined with pertinent authority cited”
“A reviewing court is entitled to have the issues clearly defined with pertinent authority cited and is not simply a depository into which the appealing party may dump the burden of argument and research.”
“A reviewing court is entitled to have the issues clearly defined with pertinent authority cited and is not simply a depository into which the appealing party may dump the burden of argument and research.”
“A reviewing court is entitled to have the issues clearly defined with pertinent authority cited and is not simply a depository into which the appealing party may dump the burden of argument and research.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: McCULLOUGH

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this 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.