Luthy v. Keehner
Appellate Court of Illinois
1Concurrence
Mr. JUSTICE STOUDER,
specially concurring:
Although I agree with the result reached by the majority and the reasoning used to reach the result, I find it necessary to comment on the rule permitting the admissions of plaintiffs’ grantor to be admitted as substantive evidence. Although the majority properly states that the declarations and admissions of a former owner or possessor of property against his interest, made during the continuance of his interest or possession, are evidence against those subsequently obtaining possession or title from him, I believe this is an unwise rule rife with the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Grand Liquor Co. v. Department of RevenueIllinois Supreme Court · 1977
- Bald v. NuernbergerIllinois Supreme Court · 1915
- Gage v. EddyIllinois Supreme Court · 1899
- Lang v. MetzgerIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
- City of Elgin v. BeckwithIllinois Supreme Court · 1887
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.