Court Opinion

ID: 9726388
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 12:47:28.173434+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:26.784661
License: Public Domain

PRESIDING JUSTICE MYERSCOUGH, specially concurring in part and dissenting in part: I respectfully concur in part and dissent in part. I would reverse, but on all grounds. Golden Rule does not mandate summary judgment as to Amanda’s actual knowledge and belief. Golden Rule merely mandates reconsideration in light of a lesser standard of accuracy. Material issues remain as to Amanda’s belief in the truth of the response concerning an animal. This assessment involves a credibility determination to be made by the jury. Golden Rule, 203 Ill. 2d at 467, 786 N.E.2d at 1017. We do not know whether Amanda read the question and response or whether she thought “an animal” included a dog. I would reverse on this issue.