Legal Opinion

Schmidt v. Hinshaw, Culbertson, Moelmann, Hoban and Fuller

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided August 14, 1979No. 78-1058PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Mr. PRESIDING JUSTICE ST AMOS

delivered the opinion of the court:

Plaintiff, John P. Schmidt, brought this action against defendants, Hinshaw, Culbertson, Moelmann, Hoban & Fuller (Hinshaw), a law firm, and the partners therein, seeking to recover for damages allegedly arising from Hinshaw’s representation of plaintiff in and subsequent to the sale of plaintiff’s business. Plaintiff essentially alleged that Hinshaw was guilty of malpractice in failing to exercise the requisite care and skill and in representing conflicting interests.

Following extensive discovery, the circuit court of Cook…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Cinema 5, Ltd. v. Cinerama, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
  2. Westinghouse Electric Corporation v. Gulf Oil Corporation, and United Nuclear CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1978
  3. People v. GeroldIllinois Supreme Court · 1914
  4. People v. CosletIllinois Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Kohler v. Woollen, Brown & HawkinsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1973

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Barth v. ReaganIllinois Supreme Court · 1990
  2. O'NEIL v. BerganDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
  3. ABC Trans National Transport, Inc. v. Aeronautics Forwarders, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1980
  4. Metrick v. ChatzAppellate Court of Illinois · 1994
  5. Nika v. DanzAppellate Court of Illinois · 1990

25 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