City of Chicago v. Verdon
Appellate Court of Illinois
Appeal from interlocutory order. Appeal from the Superior 'Court of Cook County; the Hon. Elbridge Hahecy, Judge, presiding. Statement by the Court. This is an appeal from an interlocutory order granting an injunction against the city of Chicago.
Read the full summary
Appeal from interlocutory order. Appeal from the Superior 'Court of Cook County; the Hon. Elbridge Hahecy, Judge, presiding. Statement by the Court. This is an appeal from an interlocutory order granting an injunction against the city of Chicago. According to appellee’s statement the purpose of the bill is to prevent the city “from discriminating against appellee and refusing to grant him a permit such as other merchants in the same vicinity are being granted, and to prevent the city of Chicago from destroying his business and confiscating his goods.” The bill alleges that appellee has for a…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Freeman
The injunction cannot be sustained upon the face of the hill itself. The city has no power by permit, ordinance or otherwise to convert or appropriate any portion of the sidewalks upon public streets for private use. The streets are held and controlled in trust for the use of the general public, and “no corporation or individual can acquire an exclusive right to their use, or to the use of any part of them for private purposes.” Smith v. McDowell, 148 Ill. 51-64; John Anisfield Co. v. Grossman, 98 Ill. App. 180-187; Heineck v. Grosse, 99 Ill. App. 441-443, and cases there cited; Pennsylvania…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Smith v. McDowellIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
- People ex rel. Faulkner v. HarrisIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
- Pennsylvania Co. v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1899
- John Anisfield Co. v. Edward B. Grossman & Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1901
- Heineck v. GrosseAppellate Court of Illinois · 1902