Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gholson v. Downen

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided December 21, 1987No. 5—87—0071Published

1DissentJustice Welch

I disagree with the majority because Alan Downen, acting in his official capacity as State’s Attorney.of Hamilton County, was at all times, and is in this appeal, representing the interests of Hamilton County, Illinois. Further, Hamilton County was a proper party to intervene in this action in the trial court and is a proper party to bring this appeal.

A State's Attorney is authorized, and required, by statute to “commence and prosecute all actions, suits, indictments and prosecutions, civil and criminal, in the circuit court for his county, in which the people of the State or county may be…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Robinson v. HanrahanSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Lynch v. DevineAppellate Court of Illinois · 1977
  3. Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago Ex Rel. O'Keeffe v. Ingram Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1981
  4. People Ex Rel. Hanrahan v. One 1965 OldsmobileIllinois Supreme Court · 1972
  5. W. H. Lyman Construction Co. v. Village of GurneeAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985

7 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