Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lustig v. Hutchinson

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided January 14, 1953No. Gen. No. 45,757Published

1DissentKilby, J.

A fair summary of the majority opinion is that substantial justice has been done in the case because (a) plaintiff earned his commission and his recovery should not be defeated by a technicality not objected to either at the trial or complained of in this court, (b) Cuneo was rightly dismissed out because of lack of evidence that he authorized Hutchinson to employ plaintiff, and (c) Hutchinson had the burden of proving his authority to employ plaintiff and failing to make proof should be held personally liable.

Plaintiff did earn his commission. Cuneo was rightly dismissed because it is…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Owens-Illinois Glass Co. v. McKibbinIllinois Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Jamison v. LambornAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1923
  3. Willoughby v. BrownAppellate Court of Illinois · 1914
  4. Reeb v. BronsonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1915

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API