Legal Opinion

Golden v. Mullen

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided May 1, 1998No. 1-96-2931PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hourihane

The principle issue on appeal is whether the circuit court erred by extending the absolute privilege that attaches to defamatory statements of attorneys made in the course of judicial proceedings to postlitigation statements made to the client. For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

Golden and Mullen are Illinois attorneys. The complaint 1 alleges that in 1994 and 1995 Mullen and his firm represented Charles W. Sullivan (Sullivan) in litigation against William E. Switzer (Switzer) in Cook and Du Page Counties, such representation…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Kolegas v. Heftel Broadcasting Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Libco Corp. v. AdamsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1981
  3. Barakat v. MatzAppellate Court of Illinois · 1995
  4. Dean v. KirklandAppellate Court of Illinois · 1939
  5. Parrillo, Weiss & Moss v. CashionAppellate Court of Illinois · 1989

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

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Hopewell v. VitulloAppellate Court of Illinois · 1998
  2. Kurczaba v. PollockAppellate Court of Illinois · 2000
  3. Romanek v. ConnellyAppellate Court of Illinois · 2001
  4. Piser v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 2010
  5. O'Callaghan v. SatherlieAppellate Court of Illinois · 2015

28 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