Legal Opinion · Dissent

Macrito v. Zaverdas

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided June 30, 1989No. 1—86—3428Published

1DissentJustice Pincham

I dissent. I do not agree with the majority’s conclusion that:

“[T]he circuit court correctly ruled that the provisions of ‘An Act to protect workers and the general public from injury or death during construction or repair of bridges and highways within the State of Illinois’ (Act) (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 121, pars. 314.1 through 314.8) do not apply where two-way flow of traffic has been maintained through a highway construction site.” (186 Ill. App. 3d at 563.)

Nor do I agree with the majority’s conclusions that:

“Other language in section 4, requiring demarcation ‘where vehicles have…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. City of Springfield v. Board of Election Commissioners of SpringfieldIllinois Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Vegich v. McDougal Hartmann Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Filipetto v. Village of WilmetteAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985
  4. Bauer v. H.H. Hall Construction Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1986
  5. Dodson v. ShawAppellate Court of Illinois · 1983

5 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