Legal Opinion · Dissent

Tamimie v. City of Galesburg

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided July 21, 1977No. 76-487Published

1Dissent

Mr. JUSTICE BARRY,

specially concurring in part and dissenting in part:

The majority opinion, I believe is correct in deciding that the denial of the plaintiff’s motion for a continuance was not an abuse of discretion. Unquestionably, a telephone call on the morning of trial, after the prospective jurors have been assembled, is not the appropriate time or manner for requesting a continuance.

However, I firmly believe that it was an abuse of discretion for the trial court to deny the motion to vacate. There is no doubt the trial court has the discretion to set aside any final order or judgment if…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Reid v. Phillip G.Illinois Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Windmon v. BanksAppellate Court of Illinois · 1975
  3. Sarro v. Illinois Mutual Fire InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1962
  4. Dienthal v. BranovackiAppellate Court of Illinois · 1974
  5. Ingersoll Aluminum Products Co. v. BusseAppellate Court of Illinois · 1977

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

Powered by the Exa API