People v. Perry

How courts have described this case

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

• forensic pathologist’s expertise did not extend to determining the ability of the defendant mother to feel her infant beneath her while asleep, despite the fact that he had a “special interest” in child abuse and had coauthored a paper on the topic
• forensic pathologist's expertise did not extend to determining the ability of the defendant mother to feel her infant beneath her while asleep, despite the fact that he had a \special interest\ in child abuse and had coauthored a paper on the topic
• forensic pathologist's expertise did not extend to determining the ability of the defendant mother to feel her infant beneath her while asleep, despite the fact that he had a \special interest\ in child abuse and had coauthored a paper on the topic

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• People v. Oaks
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1996-02-15· cited 175×
• Bachman v. General Motors Corp.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2002-07-29· cited 63×
• People v. Moody
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1990-05-22· cited 15×
• People v. Perry
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1992-04-22· cited 12×
• People v. Patten
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1992-06-09· cited 12×
• People v. Williams
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1993-08-27· cited 11×
• People v. Cullen
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1992-07-20· cited 8×
• United States Ex Rel. Jones v. Washington
  N.D. Illinois· 1993-09-10· cited 2×

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Coffey v. Hancock
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1984-03-06· cited 33×
• Harvey v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1979-06-15· cited 16×