Legal Opinion

Carnevale v. Inland Ryerson Building Systems

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided April 29, 1988No. 87-2309PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Stamos

Plaintiff, Vito Carnevale (Carnevale), appeals the trial court’s order granting defendant’s summary judgment motion as to count I of Carnevale’s third amended complaint. Count I of Camevale’s third amended complaint alleges that defendant, Inland Ryerson Building Systems, a division of INRYCO, Inc. (Inland), is liable under the Structural Work Act (the Act) (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 48, par. 60 et seq.) for injuries that Carnevale sustained when he fell upon bar joists which he was attempting to cross through and over while carrying lengths of plumbing piping.

Carnevale, a full journeyman…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Louis v. BarenfangerIllinois Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Vuletich v. United States Steel Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Tenenbaum v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Shaheed v. Chicago Transit AuthorityAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985
  5. Ashley v. Osman & Associates, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1983

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Ralls v. Village of Glendale HeightsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1992
  2. Smith v. Excello Press, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1988
  3. Salemi v. Klein Construction Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1994
  4. Pozzi v. McGee Associates, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1992
  5. Dubrovich v. Commonwealth Edison Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1991

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