Central States Import & Export Corp. v. Illinois Liquor Control Commission
| Decision Date | 18 January 1950 |
| Docket Number | No. 31201,31201 |
| Citation | 89 N.E.2d 903,405 Ill. 58 |
| Parties | CENTRAL STATES IMPORT & EXPORT CORPORATION v. ILLINOIS LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Ivan A. Elliott, Attorney General (William C. Wines, James C. Murray, and Raymond S. Sarnow, all of Chicago, of counsel), for appellant.
Joseph I. Bulger and Ode L. Rankin, both of Chicago, for appellee.
In accordance with the provisions of the Illinois Liquor Control Act, the Central States Import and Export Corporation was cited before the Illinois Liquor Control Commission to show cause why its application for an importing distributor's State license should not be denied for violation of section 2 of the act of July 24, 1947, regulating the sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1947, chap. 43, par. 206.) After a hearing before the commission, and on February 15, 1949, it was held that the appellee had violated the provisions of the Illinois Liquor Control Act in that appellee had never filed with the commission any fair trade agreement such as is required by the act cited above. It was further ordered that the said corporation immediately cease and desist the sale of alcoholic liquors in the State of Illinois.
On appeal to the circuit court of Cook County, the orders of the commission were reversed, declared null and void and of no effect. This appeal comes from that judgment of the circuit court.
The only question involved in this proceeding was whether or not appellee was entitled to an importing distributor's license for the period commencing July 1, 1948, and expiring June 30, 1949; therefore, as of the present time, that question is no longer in controversy. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1947, chap. 43, par. 117.) The judgment of the circuit court of Cook County, entered April 5, 1949, was for the appellee, and at the time the notice of appeal was filed by the Illinois Liquor Control Commission, the question was still in controversy. However because of the lapse of time, success or failure on appeal is of no consequence to either party at this date and the case has become strictly moot.
This court has held that ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Monsanto Co. v. Illinois Pollution Control Bd.
...N.E.2d 224; Railway Express Agency v. Illinois Commerce Comm'n., 374 Ill. 151, 28 N.E.2d 116; Central States Import & Export Corp. v. Illinois Liquor Control Comm'n., 405 Ill. 58, 89 N.E.2d 903; Maywood Park Trotting Ass'n., Inc. v. Illinois Harness Racing Comm'n., 15 Ill.2d 559, 155 N.E.2d......
-
La Salle Nat. Bank v. City of Chicago
... ... No. 33114 ... Supreme Court of Illinois ... May 24, 1954 ... Rehearing Denied Sept. 20, ... to the Constitution of the United States.' ... The complaint sought a ... Johnson, 406 Ill. 392, 94 N.E.2d 317; Central States Import & Export Corp. v. Illinois Liquor ... ...
-
Berg v. City of Chicago
...to guide potential future litigation. Siefferman v. Johnson, 406 Ill. 392, 94 N.E.2d 317; Central States Import and Export Corp. v. Illinois Liquor Control Com., 405 Ill. 58, 89 N.E.2d 903; Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. Commerce Comm., 374 Ill. 151, 28 N.E.2d 116; Chaitlen v. Kaspar Ameri......
-
Patel v. Illinois State Medical Soc.
...Wellman, 174 Ill.2d 335, 353, 220 Ill.Dec. 360, 673 N.E.2d 272, 280 (1996); accord, Central States Import & Export Corp. v. Illinois Liquor Control Commission, 405 Ill. 58, 59, 89 N.E.2d 903, 904 (1950); Chaitlen v. Kaspar American State Bank, 372 Ill. 83, 87, 22 N.E.2d 673, 675 (1939). How......