Mexicali Club, Inc. v. Illinois Liquor Control Commission
| Decision Date | 01 April 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 62190,62190 |
| Citation | 347 N.E.2d 190,37 Ill.App.3d 797 |
| Parties | MEXICALI CLUB, INC., an Illinois Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ILLINOIS LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION and Local Liquor Control Commissioner of Joliet, Maurice Berlinsky, Mayor of Joliet, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
James M. P. D'Amico, Corp. Counsel, Joliet, for defendant-appellant.
Joseph B. Gilbert, Chicago, for plaintiff-appellee.
This is an appeal by defendant Maurice Berlinsky, Mayor and Local Liquor Control Commissioner of the City of Joliet, Illinois (Local Commissioner), from an order of the circuit court of Cook County which denied his motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, to transfer the administrative review action commenced by plaintiff, Mexicali Club, Inc. Defendant Illinois Liquor Control Commission did not join in the motion. The sole contention raised by the Local Commissioner upon appeal is that the trial court erred in finding proper venue in the circuit court of Cook County. The merits of the contention will not be reached since the order is not appealable. We therefore dismiss the appeal.
Plaintiff's local liquor license was suspended and revoked by the Local Commissioner. On appeal to the Illinois Liquor Control Commission, the decision was affirmed. Plaintiff then filed a complaint for administrative review in the circuit court pursuant to section 8b of Article VII of the Illinois Liquor Control Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.1973, ch. 43, par. 154A). On May 9, 1975, the Local Commissioner moved that the trial court dismiss plaintiff's complaint, or in the alternative, transfer the cause to the circuit court of Will County allegedly the only proper venue for the action. On that day the trial court granted plaintiff's motion to enjoin enforcement of the suspension and revocation order during the pendency of the administrative review. The trial court, however, took no action on the Local Commissioner's motion. The Local Commissioner filed a second motion to dismiss or alternatively, to transfer the cause. In a written order, dated June 6, 1975, the trial court denied the Local Commissioner's second motion and also expressly found that there was 'no just cause to delay the immediate execution of this order or appeal therefrom.' The present appeal was then instituted with the filing of the Local Commissioner's notice of appeal which states in pertinent part:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the within cause is hereby appealed to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, from the Order entered by the Honorable Edward F. Healy entered June 6, 1975, denying the Motion of Appellants, Local Liquor Control Commissioner of Joliet, and Maurice Berlinsky, Mayor of Joliet, to dismiss this cause or in the alternative to transfer it to the Circuit Court of Will County, the effect of which Order was to allow the Court's Injunction entered May 9, 1975, to stand.
This Appeal is taken pursuant to Illinois Revised Statutes Chapter 110A, Section 307.
The relief sought in the Appellate Court, First District, is to reverse the Trial Court's Order of May 6, 1975, to Dismiss this cause or in the alternative to remand it to the Circuit Court of Cook County with instructions that it be transferred to the Circuit Court of Will County for further proceedings and to dissolve the Injunction against the Local Liquor Control Commissioner of the City of Joliet entered May 9, 1975.
In the instant case, the notice of appeal states that it is brought pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 307 (Ill.Rev.Stat.1973, ch. 110A, par. 307). Subsection (a) of the rule provides for appeals from certain specified interlocutory orders, including orders granting, modifying, refusing, dissolving, or refusing to dissolve or modify an injunction. Although a portion of the relief sought is the dissolution of the injunction entered by the trial court on May 9, 1975, the notice of appeal expressly states that the appeal is taken from the order entered by the trial court on June 6, 1975...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pleasant v. Pleasant
...105 Ill.Dec. 739, 504 N.E.2d 1257.) Since venue orders are nonfinal, nonappealable orders (Mexicali Club, Inc. v. Illinois Liquor Control Comm'n (1976), 37 Ill.App.3d 797, 799, 347 N.E.2d 190) and are a step in the procedural process, the change of venue issue is not As to the merits of the......
-
Williams v. A. E. Staley Mfg. Co.
...or order comes within one of the specified exceptions set forth in the Supreme Court Rules. (Mexicali Club, Inc. v. Illinois Liquor Control Commission (1976), 37 Ill.App.3d 797, 347 N.E.2d 190; Browning v. Heritage Insurance Co. (1974), 20 Ill.App.3d 622, 314 N.E.2d 1.) Neither of the parti......
-
City of Chicago v. Airline Canteen Service, Inc.
...any Supreme Court rule authorize an appeal from an interlocutory order of such nature. (Mexicali Club, Inc. v. Illinois Liquor Control Commission (1st Dist. 1976), 37 Ill.App.3d 797, 799, 347 N.E.2d 190; Stark v. Roussey & Associates, Inc. (1st Dist. 1970), 131 Ill.App.2d 379, 382, 266 N.E.......
-
Slates v. International House of Pancakes, Inc.
...44 Ill.2d 412, 255 N.E.2d 900, cert. denied (1970), 400 U.S. 941, 91 S.Ct. 232, 27 L.Ed.2d 244; Mexicali Club, Inc., v. Illinois Liquor Control Com. (1976), 37 Ill.App.3d 797, 347 N.E.2d 190. We find that the order which plaintiff is appealing was not a final order under Rule 301. The order......