Legal Opinion

Spraying Systems Co. v. William G. Smart Co.

District Court, N.D. Illinois

Decided March 20, 1992No. 91 C 1049PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

SHADUR, District Judge.

On January 3, 1992 this Court, in an oral bench ruling, denied what plaintiff Spraying Systems Co. (“Spraying Systems”) had characterized as a Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 56 motion for summary judgment.1 In the course of that denial, this Court held that witnesses Robert Mueller and George Wor-thington were not rendered incompetent to testify for then defendant William Smart (“Smart”) under the Illinois Dead Man’s Act (either Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 110, U 8-201 or id. II8-3012), while at the same time it ruled that Smart himself was squarely barred from…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Gail D. Konradi, Personal Representative of the Estate of Glenn J. Konradi v. United States of America and Robert E. FarringerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1990
  2. Pink v. DempseyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1953
  3. Teamsters Local 282 Pension Trust Fund v. AngelosDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1986
  4. Import Sales, Inc. v. Continental Bearings Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1991
  5. Spitzer v. Bradshaw-Praeger & Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1956

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Spraying Systems Co. v. William G. Smart Co., Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API