Grimwood v. Tabor Grain Co., Div. of Archer Daniels Midland Corp., 3-84-0379
Citation | 474 N.E.2d 920,130 Ill.App.3d 708,86 Ill.Dec. 6 |
Decision Date | 14 February 1985 |
Docket Number | No. 3-84-0379,3-84-0379 |
Parties | , 86 Ill.Dec. 6 Raymond GRIMWOOD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TABOR GRAIN COMPANY, a DIVISION OF ARCHER DANIELS MIDLAND CORP., a Nevada Corporation, Defendant-Appellee. |
Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Page 920
v.
TABOR GRAIN COMPANY, a DIVISION OF ARCHER DANIELS MIDLAND
CORP., a Nevada Corporation, Defendant-Appellee.
Third District.
[130 Ill.App.3d 709]
Page 921
[86 Ill.Dec. 7] Robert A. Morelli, Telford & Morelli, Ltd., LaSalle, for plaintiff-appellant.Michael T. Reagan, Herbolsheimer, Lannon, Henson, Duncan & Reagan, P.C., LaSalle, for defendant-appellee.
HEIPLE, Justice.
The plaintiff-appellant, Raymond Grimwood, brought this action against the defendant-appellee, Tabor Grain Company, to recover for personal injuries suffered when he fell off his motorcycle after turning onto the entranceway of the defendant's plant. Count I of the plaintiff's amended complaint alleged negligence on the part of the defendant and Count II alleged wilful and wanton misconduct. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendant on both counts.
The facts pertinent to this appeal are as follows. The plaintiff's father, Clifford Grimwood (Mr. Grimwood), was employed by the defendant at its grain elevator in Long Point, Illinois. On June 21, 1984, Mr. Grimwood was at the elevator working on the defendant's equipment. Mr. Grimwood was not scheduled to work that day, a Sunday, and the elevator was not open for business. At about noon, the plaintiff drove his motorcycle to the defendant's elevator to remind his father to come home for lunch. The plaintiff was not employed by the defendant. [130 Ill.App.3d 710] As the plaintiff turned onto the defendant's driveway, he hit a series of potholes and ruts and fell to the ground, injuring himself.
On several occasions before the accident, the plaintiff had visited his father at the defendant's grain elevator during both working and non-working hours. Other members of Mr. Grimwood's family had
Page 922
[86 Ill.Dec. 8] also visited Mr. Grimwood at work. Mr. Grimwood was never told by his supervisor that members of his family should not visit him at the plant. During the plaintiff's prior visits to the elevator, he had traveled over the driveway. However, he had never traveled over the driveway on his motorcycle. The plaintiff had known for approximately one year of the driveway's bad condition. He saw the potholes and ruts as he turned onto the driveway on the day he was injured.The plaintiff's first contention is that summary judgment was improperly granted as to Count...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Figueroa v. Evangelical Covenant Church, 88-3201
......S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 158-59, 90 S.Ct. 1598, 1608-09, ... Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 324, 106 S.Ct. 2548, ..., 514 N.E.2d 792, 796 (4th Dist.1987); Grimwood v. Tabor Grain Co., 130 Ill.App.3d 708, 711, 86 ......
-
Hopkinson v. Chicago Transit Authority, 1-88-3258
......170, Cook Co. v. Illinois State Board of Education (1984), 122 ...Evangelical Covenant Church, citing Grimwood v. Tabor Grain Co. (1985), 130 Ill.App.3d 708, ... (Smith's Transfer Corp. v. Industrial Com. (1979), 76 Ill.2d 338, 350, ......
-
B.C. v. J.C. Penney Co., Inc., 1-88-0453
...the other's business or activities, with resulting mutual benefit to the other and the invitee. (Grimwood v. Tabor Grain Co. (1985), 130 Ill.App.3d 708, 86 Ill.Dec. 6, 474 N.E.2d 920.) None of these factors is present in this Plaintiff contends in the alternative that Illinois decisions hav......
-
Dowen v. Hall
...plaintiff was not an invitee upon the defendants' property. Contrary to plaintiff's argument, Grimwood v. Tabor Grain Company (1985), 130 Ill.App.3d 708, 710, 86 Ill.Dec. 6, 474 N.E.2d 920 did not establish a different rule than that set forth by the Illinois Supreme Court in Pashinian. Pla......