Trophytime, Inc. v. Graham
| Decision Date | 26 June 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 15385,15385 |
| Parties | , 29 Ill.Dec. 391 TROPHYTIME, INC., an Illinois Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Larry GRAHAM, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Law Offices of Mort A. Segall, Mort A. Segall, Champaign, for plaintiff-appellant.
Francis J. Davis, Maloney & Davis, Urbana, for defendant-appellee.
We do not reach the merits.
We Cannot.
No jurisdiction.
Here's why: A motion directed against an Interlocutory order will not toll the running of the 30-day deadline for the filing of the notice of appeal.
Trophytime sought Inter alia to have a former employee enjoined from competing with plaintiff, based upon an alleged breach of contract. After hearings, the trial court, in a memorandum opinion and order dated August 30, 1978, denied plaintiff's request for an injunction. Then, a motion to vacate the August 30th order was filed by plaintiff on September 13, 1978. That motion sought a rehearing on defendant's motion for judgment or, in the alternative, leave to file an amendment to the complaint. This motion was denied on November 30, 1978, and on December 27, 1978, the plaintiff filed a notice of interlocutory appeal.
This court observing that the notice of interlocutory appeal was filed almost Four months after entry of the order being appealed Sua sponte entered a rule to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for failure to comply with Supreme Court Rule 307. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1977, ch. 110A, par. 307.) We conclude that plaintiff's notice of interlocutory appeal was not timely filed and therefore this appeal must be dismissed.
Supreme Court Rule 307 allows an interlocutory appeal to be perfected by the filing of a notice of appeal within 30 days from the entry of the interlocutory order denying an injunction. Having failed to meet this time restriction, plaintiff now argues that its motion requesting that the August 30th order be vacated extended the time within which it could file a timely notice of appeal. Under plaintiff's reasoning, the notice of appeal was timely filed since it was filed within 30 days of the date that its September 13 motion was denied.
We cannot agree.
In Seaman v. Lawn Savings & Loan Association (1970), 128 Ill.App.2d 181, 262 N.E.2d 823, the plaintiff argued that his motion, filed subsequent to the entry of an interlocutory order, started over again the time for filing the notice of such an appeal under section 68.3 of the Civil Practice Act. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1969, ch. 110, par. 68.3.) In rejecting this contention, the Seaman court pointed out that section 68.3 deals with motions to vacate or modify final decrees or final judgments in cases tried without a jury. It does not appear to have any relevance to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Marker
...Downers Grove Nissan, 354 Ill.App.3d 1023, 1025-29, 291 Ill.Dec. 66, 822 N.E.2d 941 (2005), and Trophytime, Inc. v. Graham, 73 Ill. App.3d 335, 335-37, 29 Ill.Dec. 391, 391 N.E.2d 1074 (1979), do hold that the filing of a motion to reconsider cannot extend the deadline for filing civil inte......
-
Elg v. Whittington
...time for filing a timely notice of appeal. Thus Barnes actually supports our decision here. See also Trophytime, Inc. v. Graham (1979), 73 Ill.App.3d 335, 29 Ill.Dec. 391, 391 N.E.2d 1074 (no toll of interlocutory order under Rule 307). Burnicka v. Marquette National Bank (1982), 88 Ill.2d ......
-
People v. Marker, 2-06-1071.
...354 Ill.App.3d 1023, 1026, 291 Ill.Dec. 66, 822 N.E.2d 941 (2005), which, in turn, relies upon Trophytime, Inc. v. Graham, 73 Ill.App.3d 335, 335-36, 29 Ill.Dec. 391, 391 N.E.2d 1074 (1979), for the proposition that a motion to reconsider is ineffective to toll the time for appeal from an i......
-
Barnes v. Southern Ry. Co.
...appeal. See In re Adoption of Anderson (1980), 88 Ill.App.3d 42, 43 Ill.Dec. 374, 410 N.E.2d 374; Trophy-time, Inc. v. Graham (1979), 73 Ill.App.3d 335, 29 Ill.Dec. 391, 391 N.E.2d 1074 ; Seaman v. Lawn Savings & Loan Association (1970), 128 Ill.App.2d 181, 262 N.E.2d 823; Ill.Ann.Stat., ch......