Legal Opinion

Olson v. Etheridge

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided September 25, 1997No. 82200PublishedCited by 64 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bilandic

Bay v. Williams, 112 Ill. 91 (1884), established the rule in Illinois that the rights of a third-party beneficiary in a contract are subject to immediate vesting and, once vested, cannot be altered or extinguished through a later agreement of the contracting parties without the assent of the beneficiary. Bay, 112 Ill. at 96-97. We are here called upon to determine the continued validity of the Bay rule.

The four plaintiffs in this case are third-party beneficiaries of a promise contained in a contract entered into by the appellant and another party. The circuit court of Bureau County awarded…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Outboard Marine Corp. v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Purtill v. HessIllinois Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Carson Pirie Scott & Co. v. ParrettIllinois Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Bay v. WilliamsIllinois Supreme Court · 1884
  5. Reed v. BasconIllinois Supreme Court · 1988

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by64 opinions

  1. Eychaner v. GrossIllinois Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Jones v. Chicago HMO Ltd. of IllinoisIllinois Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Anicich v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2017
  4. Chemetall Gmbh v. Zr Energy, Inc., Joseph T. Fraval, and Arnold BerkovitzCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2003
  5. Ervin v. Nokia, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2004

59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API