Farley v. Marion Power Shovel Co.
Illinois Supreme Court
1DissentJustice Goldenhersh
I dissent. I agree with the well-reasoned opinion of the appellate court and would hold that the power shovel is a structure within the contemplation of the Structural Work Act. I find it difficult to reconcile this opinion with Warren v. Meeker, 55 Ill.2d 108, in which we held that a grain bin, sold under a lease agreement as personalty, and admittedly easily removable, was a “structure.” The majority purports to rely upon the New York case of Caddy v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co. (1909), 195 N.Y. 415, 88 N.E. 747, which upon careful reading is not authority for the position which the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Halberstadt v. Harris Trust & Savings BankIllinois Supreme Court · 1973
- Caddy v. . Interborough Rapid Transit Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1909
- Warren v. MeekerIllinois Supreme Court · 1973
- Bullman v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1937
- Juenger v. Bucyrus-Erie CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Illinois · 1968
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.