Legal Opinion
Toland v. Davis
Appellate Court of Illinois
Decided February 27, 1998No. 3-97-0373PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Lytton
After filing a complaint that alleged defendants provided defective roofing supplies and repair services, plaintiffs agreed to dismiss their claims against defendant Tamko Roofing Products, Inc., and settled their claims with the remaining defendants. Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 137 (134 Ill. 2d R. 137), Tamko filed a motion for sanctions against plaintiffs’ counsel, Lehrer, Flaherty & Canavan P.C. (LF&C). The trial judge awarded sanctions in the amount of $5,000. LF&C appeals. We reverse.
Supreme Court Rule 137 permits a court to impose sanctions against a party or attorney who improperly…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Fleischmann Distilling Corp. v. Maier Brewing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Albert J. Gaiardo and Patricia Gaiardo, His Wife v. Ethyl Corporation, A/K/A Ethyl Corporation, Visqueen DivisionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
- Estate of Wernick v. MacKsIllinois Supreme Court · 1989
- Arcambel v. WisemanSupreme Court of the United States · 1796
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Peterson v. RandhavaAppellate Court of Illinois · 2000
- Addis v. Exelon Generation Co., LLCAppellate Court of Illinois · 2007
- Turner Investors v. PirklAppellate Court of Illinois · 2003
- McWilliams v. DettoreAppellate Court of Illinois · 2009
- Feret v. SchillerstromAppellate Court of Illinois · 2006
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.