Winger v. Chicago City Bank & Trust Co.

• Decision Date: 19 March 1946
• Docket Number: 28985.,Nos. 28984,s. 28984
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Parties: WINGER et al. v. CHICAGO CITY BANK & TRUST CO. et al.

392 Ill. 624

65 N.E.2d 688

WINGER et al.

v.CHICAGO CITY BANK & TRUST CO. et al.

Nos. 28984, 28985.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

March 19, 1946.

Appeal from Third Division of Appellate Court for First District, on Appeal from Circuit Court, Cook County; Julius H. Miner, Judge.

On motion based on a stipulation to remand the cause to the trial court for final disposition.

Motion denied.

See, also, 325 Ill.App. 459, 60 N.E.2d 560.Vogel & Bunge and Cassels, Potter & Bentley, all of Chicago, and A. M. Fitzgerald, of Springfield, for appellant George B. Pillsbury, Adm'r.

John S. Leahy, of St. Louis, Mo., and W. T. Day, of Springfield (Joseph B. Fleming and Thomas B. Martineau, both of Chicago, of counsel), for appellants Helen Z. Martin and others.

Vernon R. Loucks and Malcolm McKerchar, both of Chicago (Charles O. Loucks, Richard W. Proctor, and James L. Henry, all of Chicago, of counsel), for appellees James Wilson Winger and others.

C. J. Bassler, William S. Kleinman, and Maxfield Weisbrod, all of Chicago, for appellees Ella Krupicka and others.

Poppenhusen, Johnston, Thompson & Raymond, of Chicago (Edward R. Johnston, of Chicago, of counsel), for appellee Illinois Bankers Life Assur. Co.

PER CURIAM.

This cause was submitted at the November Term, 1945. At the present term a motion has been presented in which all of the named parties to the record have joined. The Director of Insurance has filed a motion for leave to intervene as amicus curiae.

The first motion is based on a stipulation signed by the respective attorneys appearing in the case. The stipulation is signed on behalf of the plaintiffs by the attorneys who filed the suit on behalf of the named plaintiffs. By the motion the court is asked to remand the cause ‘to the Circuit Court of Cook County for final disposition as the said court deems fair, just and equitable to all parties.'

The allowance of this motion would necessarily operate to vacate the decree from which the appeal was taken. The suit was brought by a small number of named plaintiffs for themselves and for and on behalf and for the use and benefit of all persons similarly situated and interested in the subject matter of the suit. Thereafter a small group of other individuals obtained leave to intervene. The record shows that more than seventy thousand other persons have interests in the subject matter of the suit similar to those of the named plaintiffs and intervenors. Such other parties are only vicariously represented by the named plaintiffs.

The motion now presented raises the issue of the authority of the named plaintiffs and the intervenors to enter into a stipulation which will operate to vacate the decree and to remand the cause according to the stipulation. The rule is that in a representative or class suit the named plaintiffs have the right to...