Legal Opinion

Slimack v. Country Life Insurance

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided April 14, 1992No. 5-90-0385PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Lewis

The applications of both the plaintiffs and the defendants for interlocutory appeal by permission were granted pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 308 (134 Ill. 2d R. 308). The plaintiffs seeking to maintain this class action suit pursuant to section 2 — 801 of the Civil Practice Law (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 110, par. 2 — 801) are former agents and the widow of a former agent of the defendants, Country Life Insurance Company, Country Mutual Insurance Company, and Country Casualty Insurance Company, which are related corporations and are hereafter referred to as “Country Companies.”

The plaintiffs…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Steinberg v. Chicago Medical SchoolIllinois Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Miner v. Gillette Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1981
  3. McCabe v. BurgessIllinois Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Purcell & Wardrope Chartered v. Hertz Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1988
  5. Key v. Jewel Companies, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1988

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Smith v. Illinois Central RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 2006
  2. AG Farms, Inc. v. American Premier Underwriters, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1998
  3. Avery v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 2001
  4. Haywood v. Superior Bank F S BAppellate Court of Illinois · 1993
  5. Ramirez v. MIDWAY MOVING AND STORAGE, INC.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2007

8 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