Legal Opinion

Schoenfeld v. Kulwinsky

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided January 17, 1916No. Gen. No. 21,494PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Frank H. Graham, Judge, presiding.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Baker

Plaintiff Schoenfeld issued a distress warrant to collect $100 of rent alleged to be due him from defendant Kulwinsky, and levied the same on 381 pairs of shoes, the property of defendant. The levy was made at four o’clock p. m., January 19, 1915. The goods were removed, stored, an inventory prepared, the suit begun, and a copy of the warrant and the inventory filed with the clerk of the Municipal Court before noon January 21st, about forty-four hours after the warrant was levied. .The jury by their verdict found the issues as to the right of plaintiff to levy the distress warrant arid as to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Taber v. Royal InsuranceSupreme Court of Alabama · 1899
  2. McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. BrowerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893
  3. Knickerbocker Insurance v. McGinnisIllinois Supreme Court · 1877

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Greco v. GussCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
  2. Greco v. GussCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API