Legal Opinion

City of Rockford v. Hey

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided June 16, 1937No. 24116. Judgment reversedPublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Wilson

By this appeal Clement, Henry M., and Abram Hey, doing business under the firm name and style of Hey Brothers, seek a reversal of a judgment of the circuit court of Winnebago county fining them $100, and costs, for selling and offering for sale, in Rockford, products manufactured in their ice cream factories in Dixon and Sterling without a license, in violation of “An ordinance to amend an ordinance creating Board of Health and Health Department and providing health, sanitary, hygiene and quarantine regulations in the city of Rockford,” effective June 1, 1935. The trial judge has certified…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Chicago Packing & Provision Co. v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1878
  2. R. G. Lydy, Inc. v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Arms v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1924
  4. City of Chicago v. Arbuckle Bros.Illinois Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Elsenau v. City of Chicago.Illinois Supreme Court · 1929

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Petterson v. City of NapervilleIllinois Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Village of Chatham v. County of SangamonIllinois Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Mulligan v. DunneIllinois Supreme Court · 1975
  4. People v. BrownIllinois Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Stanley v. ChastekAppellate Court of Illinois · 1962

25 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