In re Marriage of Johnson
Illinois Appellate Court
598 N.E.2d 406 (1992)
- Written by Jody Stuart, JD
Facts
Frank and Teri Johnson brought two separate cases in trial court. In the first case, the Johnsons (plaintiffs) brought a personal-injury case against a construction company (defendant), which was filed in 1988 and settled in October 1991. A condition of the settlement was that its terms were to remain confidential. The terms of the settlement were part of the court record. The second case was a case for the dissolution of the Johnsons’ marriage. In December 1991, the Johnsons, in the dissolution case, presented a settlement to the court relating to the distribution of the personal-injury settlement proceeds. The dissolution-settlement terms required that all documents in the court file be sealed. At the request of the parties in the two cases, the court impounded the court file of the dissolution case and impounded the settlement agreement in the personal-injury case. Professional Impressions Media Group, Inc., d/b/a the News-Gazette (Gazette) filed in trial court a petition to intervene and for access to the impounded court records in the two cases. The court allowed Gazette to intervene for the limited purpose of determining Gazette’s right of access to the impounded records. The court did not vacate the impoundment orders, noting that the faith of the parties would be broken if the court removed the impoundment on which the parties relied in concluding their settlements. Gazette appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Knecht, J.)
Concurrence (Steigman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.