Patrick v. Burgess Norton Mfg. Co.
| Decision Date | 26 March 1965 |
| Docket Number | Gen. No. 64-87. |
| Citation | 56 Ill. App.2d 145,205 N.E.2d 643 |
| Parties | Oscar Patrick, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Burgess Norton Mfg. Co., a Corporation, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Norman Peters and John G. Phillips, of Chicago (Sidney Z. Karasik, of counsel), for appellant.
Gates W. Clancy, of Geneva (Wendell W. Clancy, of counsel), for appellee.
(Abstract of Decision.)
Opinion by JUSTICE MORAN.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Not to be published in full.
To continue reading
Request your trial
5 cases
-
Sandman v. Marshall Field & Co.
...case before us was filed well within the one year temporal restrictions of chapter 83, section 24a. (Patrick v. Burgess Norton Manufacturing Company, 56 Ill.App.2d 145, 205 N.E.2d 643 (abst.); compare Skolnick v. Martin, 98 Ill.App.2d 166, 240 N.E.2d 296; Factor v. Carson, Pirie Scott & Co.......
- Patrick v. Burgess-Norton Mfg. Co.
-
Ray v. Bokorney
...v. Rosengren, 86 Ill.App.2d 139, 229 N.E.2d 141; Sachs v. Ohio National Ins. Co., 131 F.2d 134; Patrick v. Burgess Norton Manufacturing Company, 56 Ill.App.2d 145, 205 N.E.2d 643; Boyce v. Snow, 187 Ill. 181, 58 N.E. 403; and Roth v. Northern Assurance Co., 32 Ill.2d 40, 203 N.E.2d In Casil......
-
Casillas v. Rosengren
...if the time limited for bringing such action shall have expired during the pendency of the original suit. Patrick v. Burgess Norton Mfg. Co., 56 Ill.App.2d 145, 205 N.E.2d 643. In this case, it is not necessary for the plaintiff to rely on Section 24 to commence the new action since, becaus......
Request a trial to view additional results