Legal Opinion

County of Winnebago v. Cannell

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided April 10, 1941No. 26038. Decree affirmedPublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Shaw

The county of Winnebago, by its proper officers, filed its sworn complaint in equity to enjoin the violation of what was alleged to be a county zoning ordinance, which it was said had been adopted October 4 or 5, 1938. In the circuit court a decree was entered dissolving a temporary injunction which had been issued and dismissing the complaint for want of equity. The trial judge has certified. that the validity of a municipal ordinance is involved and that the public interest requires the appeal to come directly to this court and the cause is here by virtue of that certificate. Only a brief…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hoerrmann v. Wabash Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Town of Kaneville v. MeredithIllinois Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Nelson v. RandolphIllinois Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Higgins v. CurtissIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
  5. Smith v. Lincoln-Catalpa Building Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1932

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Blazina v. BlazinaAppellate Court of Illinois · 1976
  2. Board of County Commissioners v. RohrbachColorado Court of Appeals · 2009
  3. Klinke v. Great Northern Life InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1943
  4. Clackamas County v. HolmesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1972
  5. Oran v. Kraft-Phenix Cheese Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1944

7 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