Legal Opinion · Dissent

Madlener v. Finley

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided September 24, 1987No. 86—1278Published

1Dissent

PRESIDING JUSTICE McMORROW,

dissenting:

I respectfully dissent for three reasons. I agree with the clerk that plaintiff is barred in this litigation from arguing that the clerk had a fiduciary duty to place interpleaded funds, to which plaintiff became entitled in a distinct and separate action, in an interest bearing account. Even if plaintiff were not precluded from raising this question in this proceeding, her complaint was nevertheless properly dismissed because she has offered no legal basis to support her contention that the clerk has a “fiduciary duty” as a “public official” to place…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. City of Springfield v. AllphinIllinois Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Malone v. CosentinoIllinois Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Jones v. HodgesAppellate Court of Illinois · 1954
  4. Sanner v. Champaign CountyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1980
  5. Walker v. CockrellAppellate Court of Illinois · 1982

3 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