Navlyt v. Kalinich
| Decision Date | 30 November 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 43566,43566 |
| Citation | 53 Ill.2d 137,290 N.E.2d 219 |
| Parties | Nancy NAVLYT et al., Appellees, v. Paul T. KALINICH, Appellant. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
John W. Gilligan, Chicago, for appellant.
James P. Chapman, Chicago, for appellees.
The circuit court of Du Page County allowed the motion of the defendant, Paul T Kalinich, to strike the amended complaint filed by Mary Navlyt, individually and as mother and next friend of three minor plaintiffs, and entered judgment in favor of defendant. Plaintiffs appealed, the appellate court reversed the judgment and remanded the cause (Navlyt v. Kalinich, 125 Ill.App.2d 290, 260 N.E.2d 855), and we have allowed defendant's petition for leave to appeal.
The amended complaint alleged that defendant owned a certain parcel of real estate on which he was erecting two brick residences; that he was acting as his own general contractor and was in charge of the construction within the meaning of section 9 of the Structural Work Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.1967, ch. 48, par. 69); that a sewer system was being installed as an integral part of the structures being erected; that in the course of installing the sewer system, and while working in a trench 10 to 12 feet in depth and 2 to 3 feet wide, Joseph Navlyt, husband of plaintiff, Mary Navlyt, and father of the minor plaintiffs, was killed as the result of the collapse of a portion of one of the walls of the trench. The amended complaint, Inter alia, alleged that in violation of the Structural Work Act defendant failed to provide or erect 'safe, suitable and proper stays, supports, shorings or other mechanical contrivances' in the trench in which the deceased was working.
Defendant's motion raised the single issue that a trench is not a 'structure' within the meaning of the Structural Work Act, the trial court allowed the motion on that sole ground and we agree with the appellate court that 'The narrowly defined issue is whether the decedent, killed by the collapse of a trench, in which he was installing sewer tiles in connection with townhouse units under construction by defendant, was working on or about a 'house, building * * * or other structure' within the meaning of the act.' (125 ill.app.2d 290, at 292, 260 N.E.2d 855, at 857.) we further agree with the appellate court that we are not ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tenenbaum v. City of Chicago
...... of providing workmen in extrahazardous operations with a safe place to work * * *.' (Navlyt v. Kalinich, 125 Ill.App.2d 290, 293, 260 N.E.2d 855, 856, affirmed, 53 Ill.2d 137, 290 N.E.2d ......
-
Meyer v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 68240
...Page 723 " [142 Ill.Dec. 132] Miller v. DeWitt (1965), 59 Ill.App.2d 38, 127, 208 N.E.2d 249. In Navlyt v. Kalinich (1972), 53 Ill.2d 137, 290 N.E.2d 219, this court held that a sewer trench was a structure within the meaning of the Structural Work Act and that failure to provide shoring to......
-
Long v. City of New Boston
...... requirement that the activity be performed on a structure, the appellate court relied on Navlyt v. Kalinich (1972), 53 Ill.2d 137, 290 N.E.2d 219, and Wood v. Commonwealth Edison Co. ......
-
Simmons v. Union Elec. Co.
....... In Navlyt v. Kalinich (1972), 53 Ill.2d 137, 290 N.E.2d 219, the plaintiffs' decedent was killed by the ......