Legal Opinion
Arora v. Chui
Appellate Court of Illinois
Decided April 26, 1996No. 2-95-0051PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Thomas
The trial court granted the motion to dismiss counterplaintiffs’ counterclaims for malicious prosecution and abuse of process pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 1994)). The counterplaintiffs, David Chui, Lillian Chui, and Joseph Lau, (hereinafter referred to as the Chuis and/or Lau, respectively) appeal. We affirm.
On November 6, 1992, the counterdefendants, Vipal Arora and Nirmal Arora (hereinafter referred to as the Aroras), filed a complaint for specific performance of a contract for the sale of real property. The complaint alleged…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Meerbrey v. Marshall Field & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1990
- Swick v. LiautaudIllinois Supreme Court · 1996
- Adcock v. Brakegate, Ltd.Illinois Supreme Court · 1994
- Kokinis v. KotrichIllinois Supreme Court · 1980
- People Ex Rel. Fahner v. Carriage Way West, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1981
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Cult Awareness Network v. Church of Scientology InternationalIllinois Supreme Court · 1997
- Podolsky v. Alma Energy Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1998
- Velez v. Avis Rent a Car System, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1999
- Spiegel v. Zurich InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1997
- Bernard Podolsky, D/B/A Podolsky Oil Company v. Alma Energy Corporation and Equinox Oil Corporation, Incorporated, Alma Energy Corporation, Equinox Oil Corporation, Incorporated, M. Michael Galesi, and Stephen D. Layton v. Bernard Podolsky, D/B/A Podolsky Oil Company, and Michael PodolskyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1998
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.