Legal Opinion

Berghoff v. Cummings

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided April 18, 1922No. Gen. No. 26,891PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.

Counsel for defendant urge, as grounds for a reversal of the judgment, that there is no evidence that John J. Cummings is deceased; that no profert of letters testamentary issued to defendant was made; and that it does not sufficiently appear that defendant is the executor of said estate of John J. Cummings. There is no merit in any of these contentions. It is alleged in plaintiff’s statement of claim that John J. Cummings “has lately died” and it is admitted in defendant’s affidavit of merits that said Cummings is “now…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. McNulta v. EnschIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Mumford v. TolmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Kelleher v. Chicago City Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Murchie v. Peck Bros. & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Doyle v. DoyleIllinois Supreme Court · 1913

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. First National Bank of Evanston v. SousanesAppellate Court of Illinois · 1981
  2. Welker v. HayesMissouri Court of Appeals · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API