Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Appellate Court of Illinois· 4/24/2000

Peterson v. Randhava

Citations

  • 729 N.E.2d 75
  • 313 Ill. App. 3d 1
  • 246 Ill. Dec. 75
  • 2000 Ill. App. LEXIS 271

How courts have described this case

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

  • the substance of a motion, not its title, determines how a court should treat it
  • trial court’s dismissal of action by granting summary judgment sua sponte was improper because parties received no notice and opportunity to respond
  • “the substance of the motion, not the title, should determine how the court should treat a motion”
  • “[T]he substance of the motion, not the title, -9- No. 1-25-0507 should determine how the court should treat a motion.”
  • the substance of a motion, not its title, determines how a court should treat it
  • trial court’s dismissal of action by granting summary judgment sua sponte was improper because parties received no notice and opportunity to respond

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Frossard

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Peterson v. Randhava

1 other CourtListener record shares this case 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.