DeKing v. Urban Investment & Development Co.
Appellate Court of Illinois
1Dissent
PRESIDING JUSTICE QUINLAN,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent. The majority’s decision holds that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the attorney’s lien statute (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 13, par. 14), to enter any judgment other than an adjudication of the existence or nonexistence of an attorney’s lien. Specifically, the majority says that the trial court in this case only had subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate whether Lowrey had a lien, and if so, the amount of the lien and the manner of its enforcement. Thus, under the majority’s ruling, the proceeding here was…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Laue v. LeifheitIllinois Supreme Court · 1984
- Rhoades v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1979
- Rosewood Corp. v. Transamerica InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1974
- Hengels v. GilskiAppellate Court of Illinois · 1984
- Schniederjon v. KrupaAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.