Legal Opinion

Muesig v. Harz

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided December 30, 1935No. Gen. No. 37,988PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Mr. Presiding Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.

Plaintiff sued George Harz and Ernest A. Warfield; Tessville, an incorporated village, and the Sanitary District of Chicago, a corporation (hereinafter called Sanitary District), in case. The death of defendant Warfield was suggested and the cause proceeded to trial against the other three defendants. A jury returned a verdict finding* the three defendants guilty and assessing plaintiff’s damages in the sum of $3,000. The motion of defendant Harz for judgment in his favor notwithstanding* the verdict was allowed. The motions of…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Chicago & Alton Railroad v. ClausenIllinois Supreme Court · 1898
  2. West Chicago Park Commissioners v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Carlin v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Plew v. BoardIllinois Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Mueller v. HayesIllinois Supreme Court · 1926

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Linneen v. City of ChicagoAppellate Court of Illinois · 1941
  2. Southern Railway Company v. LileyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1947

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API