Legal Opinion

Diomar v. Landmark Associates

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided March 4, 1980No. 79-529PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hartman

Naming nine defendants 1 in his first amended complaint (hereinafter complaint) for personal injury damages he allegedly sustained when working as a pipe fitter while an employee of a subcontractor, plaintiff James L. Diomar, claimed that the sole defendant involved in this appeal, Landmark Associates (hereinafter Landmark), the architect, was one of the entities in charge of the work and was amenable to him for damages under the Structural Work Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 48, pars. 60, 69) (hereinafter the Act). Landmark’s answer denied, among other things, that it was in charge of the…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Miller v. DeWittIllinois Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Carruthers v. B. C. Christopher & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Larson v. Commonwealth Edison Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Gannon v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Allen v. MeyerIllinois Supreme Court · 1958

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Chance v. City of CollinsvilleAppellate Court of Illinois · 1983
  2. Plastics & Equipment Sales Co. v. DeSoto, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1980
  3. Block v. LOHAN ASSOCIATES, INC.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1993
  4. Aspegren v. Howmedica, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1984
  5. Montes v. HawkinsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1984

12 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