Summary
In Aetna Plywood Veneer Co. v. Robineau, 336 Ill. 339, 83 N.E.2d 896, the plaintiff appealed from an order dismissing the complaint at plaintiff's cost and from an order denying plaintiff's motion to vacate the order of dismissal and grant it leave to file an amended complaint. The court discussed extensively the rule stated in the Chicago Portrait Co. case and found that neither order from which plaintiff appeals is a final judgment or decree within meaning of sec 77 of the Civil Practice Act.
Summary of this case from Curtis v. Albion-Brown's Post 590 Am. LegionOpinion
Gen. No. 44,572. (Abstract of Decision.)
Opinion filed January 26, 1949 Rehearing denied February 11, 1949 Released for publication February 15, 1949
NEW TRIAL, § 96 — jurisdiction to grant. Where plaintiff recovered a money judgment in October 1946, on a contract for fees for services rendered in effecting reductions in defendant's utility rates, and defendant moved for a new trial on November 4, and motion was heard but undisposed of, and, on plaintiff's motion, judgment was reduced and satisfied of record on December 13, and plaintiff brought a second action in October 1947, for subsequently accruing fees, municipal court of City of Chicago did not have jurisdiction in December 1947, to grant defendant's motion for new trial in prior action and to vacate judgment therein and direct plaintiff to repay defendant money received in satisfaction thereof.
See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.
Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. FRANK E. DONOGHUE, Judge, presiding.
Orders reversed. Heard in the third division, first district, this court at the October term, 1948.
Rappaport, Clorfene Rappaport, for appellant;
Ode L. Randin, of counsel;
Dempsey, Mills Casey, for appellee;
Lawrence C. Mills and John W. Mills, of counsel.
Not to be published in full. Opinion filed January 26, 1949; rehearing denied February 11, 1949; released for publication February 15, 1949.