Legal Opinion

Hassell v. Wenglinski

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided March 5, 1993No. 1-92-1846PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice McNULTY

Plaintiff Heidi Hassell filed a multiple-count complaint for injuries caused by two dogs owned by defendant John Wenglinski. Count I of the complaint alleged that plaintiff was entitled to recover under the Animal Control Act. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 8, par. 351 et seq.) Defendant moved for judgment on the pleadings as to count I of the complaint. The trial court granted the motion, made a finding of appealability under Supreme Court Rule 304(a) (134 Ill. 2d R. 304(a)), and plaintiff timely appealed.

Plaintiff was an employee of defendant. Her position required her to care for defendant’s…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Harris v. WalkerIllinois Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Wilcoxen v. PaigeAppellate Court of Illinois · 1988
  3. Vanderlei v. HeidemanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1980
  4. Clark v. RogersAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985
  5. Ennen v. WhiteAppellate Court of Illinois · 1992

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Carl v. ResnickAppellate Court of Illinois · 1999
  2. Eyrich v. JohnsonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1996
  3. Frost v. Robave, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1998
  4. Docherty v. SadlerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1997
  5. VanPlew v. RiccioAppellate Court of Illinois · 2000

6 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