FIRST NAT. BANK OF SPRINFIELD v. Malpractice Research, Inc.
Illinois Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Miller
The plaintiffs bring this appeal from a decision of the appellate court determining that the defendants were entitled to recover the contingent fee specified in a contract entered into by the parties. 285 Ill. App. 3d 440. Under the terms of the agreement, the defendants were to attempt to provide the plaintiffs with expert witnesses and were to be available as consultants in a medical malpractice action previously filed by the plaintiffs. The circuit court of Montgomery County had reached the opposite conclusion, finding that the contract was void as contrary to public policy. The trial…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- In Re Estate of CallahanIllinois Supreme Court · 1991
- O'HARA v. AhlgrenIllinois Supreme Court · 1989
- Schumann-Heink v. FolsomIllinois Supreme Court · 1927
- Maher & Associates, Inc. v. Quality CabinetsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1994
- Goodrich v. TenneyIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Progressive Universal Insurance v. Liberty Mutual Fire InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 2005
- Phoenix Insurance v. RosenIllinois Supreme Court · 2011
- Guillen Ex Rel. Guillen v. Potomac Ins. Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 2003
- Hayes Mechanical, Inc. v. First Industrial, L.P.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2004
- Richter v. Prairie Farms DairyIllinois Supreme Court · 2016
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.