Goldstein v. Muller

Appellate Court of Illinois

Goldstein v. Muller

173 Ill. App. 664, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 473

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedDecember 9, 1912

DocketGen. No. 18,313

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 173 Ill. App. 664 (Goldstein v. Muller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Goldstein v. Muller, 173 Ill. App. 664, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 473 (Ill. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

June 24, 1912, we reserved until the hearing a motion made by the defendant in error to dismiss the writ of error in this cause because sued out more than thirty days after the judgment. We have now taken the cause into consideration and determined that we must grant the motion, for the reasons set forth in the opinion in Novelty Tufting Machinery Company v. The Peters & Roberts Furniture Company, 170 Ill. App. 134. The writ of error is therefore dismissed.

Writ of error dismissed.

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

Per Curiam.

June 24, 1912, we reserved until the hearing a motion made by the defendant in error to dismiss the writ of error in this cause because sued out more than thirty days after the judgment. We have now taken the cause into consideration and determined that we must grant the motion, for the reasons set forth in the opinion in Novelty Tufting Machinery Company v. The Peters & Roberts Furniture Company, 170 Ill. App. 134. The writ of error is therefore dismissed.

Writ of error dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

173 Ill. App. 664, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 473, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldstein-v-muller-illappct-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack