Legal Opinion
Ogle v. Fuiten
Appellate Court of Illinois
Decided February 24, 1983No. 4-82-0486PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Mills
This case alleges legal malpractice.
The complaint was dismissed below.
It should not have been.
We reverse and remand.
Plaintiffs are third-party nonclients who allege they were the intended beneficiaries of wills drafted by attorney William Fuiten. They allege that the wills failed to include a contingency which did occur, and under which the testator desired plaintiffs to be the beneficiaries. The failure of the wills to provide any beneficiaries under the contingency resulted in an intestate devolution.
The motion to dismiss was filed pursuant to sections 45 and 48 of the Civil Practice Act.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Lucas v. HammCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- Pelham v. GriesheimerIllinois Supreme Court · 1982
- Illinois State Chamber of Commerce v. Pollution Control BoardIllinois Supreme Court · 1979
- Illinois Housing Development Authority v. Sjostrom & Sons, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1982
- Bradshaw v. LewisIllinois Supreme Court · 1973
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Ennenga v. StarnsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
- Ogle v. FuitenIllinois Supreme Court · 1984
- Krawczyk v. StingleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Logotheti v. GordonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993
- Quinn v. Sigma Rho Chapter of Beta Theta Pi FraternityAppellate Court of Illinois · 1987
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.