Andronick v. Daniszewski
Appellate Court of Illinois
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Matchett
This appeal is now before this court upon rehearing granted. The action is in tort. Upon trial by jury there was a verdict for plaintiff for $999.99, upon which the court, overruling motions for a new trials and in arrest, entered judgment.
The statement of claim averred that on July 18, 1930, defendants were the owners and in possession of the premises known as 725 North Hoyne avenue, Chicago; that plaintiff was walking on the sidewalk adjoining the premises and in a public street; that she was in the exercise of due care; that it became the duty of defendants to maintain, control and operate…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Chicago City v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1863
- Water Co. v. WareSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- McHarge v. M. M. Newcomer & Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1906
- Village of Jefferson v. ChapmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1889
- Scammon v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1861
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hulke v. International Manufacturing Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1957
- Ziemba v. MierzwaAppellate Court of Illinois · 1990
- J. J. Altman & Co. v. StateCourt of Claims of Illinois · 1982