Legal Opinion · Dissent

Joseph Giddan & Sons v. Northbrook Trust & Savings Bank

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided November 12, 1986No. 85-3151Published

1DissentJustice McNAMARA

I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that an enforceable contract exists. I would affirm the holding of the trial court that the contract lacks an essential term with regard to the cross-easements.

Any possible obligation to establish easements stems first from paragraph 10 of the contract and then from the relevant municipal action. The majority focuses almost exclusively on the municipal action which required that “appropriate easements” be established prior to recording the deed. The majority views paragraph 10 as language which merely “underscores the plaintiff’s…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Chicago Investment Corp. v. DolinsIllinois Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Lenzi v. MorkinIllinois Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Foster Enterprises, Inc. v. Germania Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nAppellate Court of Illinois · 1981
  4. Interway, Inc. v. AlagnaAppellate Court of Illinois · 1980
  5. Morey v. HoffmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1957

12 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