Legal Opinion

Steinwart v. Susman

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided May 28, 1968No. Gen. 68-22 and 68-29PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Davis

The defendant, Louis Susman, appealed under Supreme Court Rules 307(a) and 307(b) (Ill Rev Stats 1967, c 110A, pars 307(a), (b)), from the interlocutory order entered by the trial court appointing a receiver pendente lite for the defendant corporation, Fox River Valley Ice Cream Co., Inc., and from the order denying his motion to vacate said order. The two appeals were perfected in that Susman questioned the adequacy of the notice of the application for the appointment of the receiver. Supreme Court Rule 307(a) relates to appeals from interlocutory orders where notice has been given of the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bagdonas v. Liberty Land & Investment Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Firebaugh v. McGovernIllinois Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Fox v. Fox Valley Trotting Club, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1953
  4. Simpson v. AdkinsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1941
  5. Cohen v. Financial Acceptance Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1965

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Fisher v. Hamilton (In Re Teknek, LLC)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 2006
  2. People Ex Rel. Fahner v. Community HospitalAppellate Court of Illinois · 1982
  3. City of Chicago v. Cosmopolitan National BankAppellate Court of Illinois · 1979
  4. People Ex Rel. Scott v. SilversteinAppellate Court of Illinois · 1980
  5. Poulakidas v. CharalidisAppellate Court of Illinois · 1979

6 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