Legal Opinion

Crawford-Adsit Co. v. Fordyce

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided February 21, 1902PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Bill for an Injunction.—Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Edward F. Dunne, Judge, presiding.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Waterman

While the rule as to what constitutes multifariousness in a bill in chancery is of that nature that it is not always clear whether a bill is demurrable for such reason, it is well settled that a bill is multifarious when it seeks to litigate several claims which are in their nature separate from and have no relation or dependence upon each other. Ryan v. Trustees of Shawneetown et al., 14 Ill. 20; Burnett et al. v. Lester, 53 Ill. 325; Whiteside Co. v. Burchell, 31 Ill. 68; Story’s Equity Pleadings, 9th Ed., Secs. 279-279a-280-284-285-286a-286b-533-534-537, notes; Murray v. Hay, 1 Barb. Ch.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Murray v. HayNew York Court of Chancery · 1845
  2. Ryan v. Trustees of ShawneetownIllinois Supreme Court · 1852
  3. Chicago & Western Indiana Railroad v. DunbarIllinois Supreme Court · 1880
  4. Chicago & Western Indiana Railroad v. DunbarIllinois Supreme Court · 1880
  5. Board of Supervisors v. BurchellIllinois Supreme Court · 1863

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Chicago Telephone Co. v. Illinois Manufacturers' Ass'nAppellate Court of Illinois · 1903
  2. Williams v. HarperAppellate Court of Illinois · 1906
  3. Gombi v. Taylor Washing Machine Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1937
  4. Leeds v. Illinois State Medical & Surgical InstituteAppellate Court of Illinois · 1905
  5. Weber v. RuppAppellate Court of Illinois · 1924

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

Powered by the Exa API