Legal Opinion

Moore v. Monarch Distributing Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided March 1, 1941PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Dady

This is an appeal by defendant from two orders of the city court of East St. Louis denying defendant’s motion and petition to vacate a judgment by confession taken by plaintiff against defendant.

Plaintiff has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that defendant has failed to include in the concluding subdivision of the statement of the case, a brief statement of the errors relied upon for reversal, in violation of rule 39 of the Supreme Court and rule 9 of this court. Each of such rules, so far as the point in question is concerned, provides that ‘ ‘ The concluding subdivision of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Schwartz v. SchwartzIllinois Supreme Court · 1937
  2. French v. WillerIllinois Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Humphreys v. MatthewsIllinois Supreme Court · 1850
  4. Ross v. Wrightwood-Hampden Building Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1933
  5. Young v. CooperIllinois Supreme Court · 1871

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Pirie v. CarrollAppellate Court of Illinois · 1960
  2. Snook v. ShawAppellate Court of Illinois · 1942
  3. Eaton v. ShieldsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1959
  4. Moore v. Monarch Distributing Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API