Legal Opinion · Dissent

Peabody v. Sanitary District

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided December 24, 1924No. Gen. No. 28,757Published

1Dissent

Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

dissenting: In my opinion the contract entered into for the construction of the sewer, between the Sanitary District of Chicago and the Illinois Improvement and Ballast Company, is not rendered invalid or void by virtue of section 3 of chapter 102, of Cahill’s Statutes, on the ground that Schmidt, the treasurer of the Sanitary District, was an officer and stockholder of the Improvement Company. That section, which was enacted in 1872, provides that: “It shall not be lawful for any person, now or hereafter holding any office, either by election or appointment * *…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In re Investigation of the Financial AffairsNew York Supreme Court · 1908

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

Powered by the Exa API