Opinion
Gen. No. 40,796. (Abstract of Decision.)
Opinion filed January 22, 1940. Rehearing denied February 5, 1940.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS, § 106 — failure to urge certain proposition on appeal, as not negligence. Where plaintiff employed defendants as attorneys to represent her in an action before the Supreme Court of the United States, in action involving agreement by a national bank to repurchase bonds sold to her, plaintiff could not recover on ground that defendants failed to urge distinction between national bank selling its own property and selling bonds as a broker, insofar as validity of repurchase agreement was concerned, because it was a conclusion of the pleader as to what the Supreme Court's decision might have been if the distinction had been urged, and later decisions showed that the repurchase agreement would still have been held beyond the powers of a national bank.
See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.
Appeal from Circuit Court of Cook county; Hon. HARRY M. FISHER, presiding. Affirmed. Heard in first division, first district, at June term, 1939; opinion filed January 22, 1940; rehearing denied February 5, 1940.
H. J. Thal, for appellant; Roy S. Gaskill, of counsel; Edward C. Higgins and Levinson, Becker, Peebles Swiren, for appellees.
"Not to be published in full."