Legal Opinion

Nelson v. Araiza

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided January 27, 1978No. 49144PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Dooley

Plaintiff, Deborah Nelson, brought this action to recover damages for personal injuries under section 14 of article VI of the Dramshop Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1969, ch. 43, par. 135). At the close of plaintiff’s case the defendant tavern owners moved for a directed verdict based on the affirmative defense of complicity. The circuit court of Cook County directed a verdict for defendants. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, deciding that complicity was an issue of fact. (43 Ill. App. 3d 685.) We granted plaintiff’s petition for leave to appeal under Rule 315 (58 Ill. 2d R.…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. Todd v. BiglowMichigan Court of Appeals · 1974
  2. Mitchell v. Shoals, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1967
  3. Hackett v. SmelsleyIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
  4. Meier v. PociusAppellate Court of Illinois · 1958
  5. Barrett v. FritzIllinois Supreme Court · 1969

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

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. Charles v. SeigfriedIllinois Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Anderson v. MoulderWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Kingston v. TurnerIllinois Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Craig v. LarsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Morris v. Farley Enterprises, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1983

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

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

Powered by the Exa API