Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

Widget HTML #1

(DOWNLOAD) "Orlicki v. Mccarthy" by Supreme Court of Illinois * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free

Orlicki v. Mccarthy

📘 Read Now     📥 Download


eBook details

  • Title: Orlicki v. Mccarthy
  • Author : Supreme Court of Illinois
  • Release Date : January 18, 1954
  • Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
  • Pages : * pages
  • Size : 64 KB

Description

This cause is before the court by virtue of a certificate of importance issued by the Appellate Court, which affirmed a judgment
of the circuit court of Cook County dismissing the complaint of plaintiffs, Stanley Orlicki, Sr., and Anna Orlicki, to recover
under the Liquor Control Act their loss of support due to the death of Walter Orlicki, allegedly caused by defendants, on
the ground that the complaint was not filed within the time designated under the 1949 amendment to the act. The uncontroverted facts are that on July 10, 1949, Walter Orlicki was fatally injured while a passenger in an automobile
driven by an allegedly intoxicated individual. At that time the right to recover under the Liquor Control Act (Ill. Rev. Stat.
1949, chap. 43, par. 135,) from owners and operators of places selling liquor for the loss of support due to the death of
an individual caused by an intoxicated person could be asserted within five years from the date of death, under the general
limitations statute. On August 10, 1949, the Liquor Control Act, upon which plaintiffs' rights against the defendants, as
owners and operators of certain dram shops, are predicated, was amended to include a provision limiting the amount recoverable
to $15,000, and requiring that "every action hereunder shall be commenced within two years next after the cause of action
accrued." Plaintiffs' complaint was filed September 27, 1951, and while the cause was pending the Appellate Court of another
district held that the time limitation provision in the amendment was retroactive. (Fourt v. DeLazzer, 348 Ill. App. 191.)
Defendants thereupon filed motions to dismiss, which were allowed by the circuit court on the theory that the amendment to
the act was procedural and therefore operated retroactively, and judgment was entered for defendants. The Appellate Court
affirmed that judgment.


Download Free Books "Orlicki v. Mccarthy" PDF ePub Kindle