Wendling v. Southern Illinois Hospital Services

How courts have described this case

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

• “Illinois courts have never applied the common fund doctrine to a creditor-debtor relationship . . . .”
• “Plaintiffs’ attorneys did not recover the settlements for the benefit of a class, but, rather, for the benefit of their clients.”
• “Plaintiffs’ attorneys did not recover the settlements for the benefit of a class, but, rather, for the benefit of their clients.”
• citation and internal quotationmarks en challenge an administrative offset [dkt. no. 90} , . The Court assumes that this resolves the last remaiming issue omitted
• “Illinois courts have never applied the common fund doctrine to a creditor-debtor relationship ***.”
• “Illinois courts have never applied the common-fund doctrine to a creditor-debtor relationship ***.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).