Muschelewicz v. Kamradt

Appellate Court of Illinois

Muschelewicz v. Kamradt

207 Ill. App. 138

Appellate Court of Illinois·Decided July 2, 1917·No. Gen. No. 23,029·Published

Opinion

Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Mandamus, § 1* — when writ of, toill not issue. A writ of mandamus will not issue where the party seeking such writ has not proved his right thereto by clear and satisfactory evidence. 2. Municipal corporations, § 146* — when illegality of appointment precludes recovery of compensation. Where a city attorney illegally appoints a person to spread assessments even though such appointment is ratified by the city, there is no legal contract existing under which there can be a recovery for any specific sum for services rendered.

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

Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Mandamus, § 1* — when writ of, toill not issue. A writ of mandamus will not issue where the party seeking such writ has not proved his right thereto by clear and satisfactory evidence. 2. Municipal corporations, § 146* — when illegality of appointment precludes recovery of compensation. Where a city attorney illegally appoints a person to spread assessments even though such appointment is ratified by the city, there is no legal contract existing under which there can be a recovery for any specific sum for services rendered.

Muschelewicz v. Kamradt, 207 Ill. App. 138 (Ill. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

207 Ill. App. 138 (Muschelewicz v. Kamradt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.