People v. M.W.W.

How courts have described this case

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

• “if in fact the order here is an order for continuance under supervision *** then the State’s assertion of unappealability is correct”
• “if in fact the order here is an order for continuance under supervision *** as it so states on its face, then the State’s assertion of unappealability is correct”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In re Michael D.
  Illinois Supreme Court· 2016-01-25· cited 33×
• In re Michael D.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2015-05-07· cited 6×
• People v. R.R.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1987-08-20· cited 3×

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Taylor
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1979-06-08· cited 560×
• In re J.N.
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1982-03-29· cited 102×
• People v. Breen
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1976-01-26· cited 52×
• People v. Smith
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1980-01-16· cited 50×
• People v. A. M.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1981-03-18· cited 17×
• People v. Scott
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1978-07-05· cited 9×
• People v. Martin
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1977-04-22· cited 8×
• People v. Horton
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1977-01-13· cited 6×
• People v. McGovern
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1978-08-14· cited 4×
• Younger v. Younger
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1977-01-27· cited 4×
• In Re AM
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1981-03-18· cited 2×