Cogley v. Daimlerchrysler Corp.

884 N.E.2d 1292, 379 Ill. App. 3d 957, 319 Ill. Dec. 47, 2008 Ill. App. LEXIS 205
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Cogley v. Daimlerchrysler Corp.. Read the opinion of the Court — 306 Ill. Dec. 243
Appellate Court of Illinois·Decided March 13, 2008·No. 2-05-1198·Published

Opinion

JUSTICE McLAREN

delivered the opinion of the court:

The supreme court, in the exercise of its supervisory authority, directed this court to vacate its decision in Cogley v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 368 Ill. App. 3d 91 (2006), and to reconsider our judgment in light of Mydlach v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 226 Ill. 2d 307 (2007). We hereby vacate our decision.

The parties have moved to dismiss the appeal by agreement. We therefore dismiss this appeal and will not reconsider our decision in light of Mydlach v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 226 Ill. 2d 307 (2007).

Pursuant to the agreement of the parties, “[pllaintiff s complaint is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to settlement with each party to bear its own costs of litigation, and this matter is remanded to the trial court for the purpose of jurisdiction as to the settlement only.”

Appellate court judgment vacated and appeal dismissed; cause remanded.

BYRNE, EJ., and BOWMAN, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cogley v. Daimlerchrysler Corp., 884 N.E.2d 1292, 379 Ill. App. 3d 957, 319 Ill. Dec. 47, 2008 Ill. App. LEXIS 205 (Ill. Ct. App. 2008).

884 N.E.2d 1292 (Cogley v. Daimlerchrysler Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cogley v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
857 N.E.2d 336 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 2006)
Mydlach v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
875 N.E.2d 1047 (Illinois Supreme Court, 2007)