Legal Opinion

Dancor International, Ltd. v. Friedman, Goldberg & Mintz

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided May 21, 1997No. 1-94-2999PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gordon

Dancor International, Ltd. (Dancor), the plaintiff, takes this interlocutory appeal from the dismissal of its accountant malpractice action filed against Friedman, Goldberg & Mintz (Friedman), the defendant. See 155 Ill. 2d R. 304(a). The trial court granted Friedman’s section 2 — 619 motion to dismiss (735 ILCS 5/2 — 619 (West 1992)), finding that Dancor’s lawsuit had not been filed within the applicable statute of limitations period. Dancor appeals from that dismissal order and from the trial court’s denial of its motion to reconsider or vacate the dismissal order. For the reasons discussed…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Knox College v. Celotex Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Nolan v. Johns-Manville AsbestosIllinois Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Hermitage Corp. v. Contractors Adjustment Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Jackson Jordan, Inc. v. Leydig, Voit & MayerIllinois Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Golla v. General Motors Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. Lucey v. Law Offices of Pretzel & Stouffer, CharteredAppellate Court of Illinois · 1998
  2. MC Baldwin Financial Co. v. DiMaggio, ROSARIO & VERAJA, LLCAppellate Court of Illinois · 2006
  3. Strassburg v. Citizens State BankSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1998
  4. In re Packaged Seafood Products Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2017
  5. Polsky v. BDO SeidmanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1997

44 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