From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Graff v. Arlington Seating Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Apr 4, 1949
337 Ill. App. 285 (Ill. App. Ct. 1949)

Opinion

Gen. No. 44,665. (Abstract of Decision.)

Opinion filed April 4, 1949 Released for publication May 17, 1949

MASTER AND SERVANT, § 54sufficiency of complaint in action by servant against master. Count in amended complaint alleging that plaintiff had been employed by defendant company, that plaintiff had endeavored to organize employees into a labor union, that company had opposed such efforts and had conspired with codefendant to maliciously injure plaintiff by publicly and falsely accusing plaintiff of stealing $30 from codefendant's locker stated a cause of action for slander, but counts seeking recovery of wages and damages for alleged malicious prosecution did not state a cause of action where there were no allegations of fact showing a contractual obligation upon which to predicate recovery of wages, and no allegation that criminal prosecution against plaintiff had terminated.

See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.

Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. JOSEPH A. GRABER, Judge, presiding.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions. Heard in the first division, first district, this court at the December term, 1948.

Estelle M. Wells, for appellant;

Deming, Jarrett Mulfinger and Hugo J. Thal, for appellees.


Not to be published in full. Opinion filed April 4, 1949; released for publication May 17, 1949.


Summaries of

Graff v. Arlington Seating Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Apr 4, 1949
337 Ill. App. 285 (Ill. App. Ct. 1949)
Case details for

Graff v. Arlington Seating Co.

Case Details

Full title:Harry J. Graff, Appellant, v. Arlington Seating Company et al., Appellees

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois, First District

Date published: Apr 4, 1949

Citations

337 Ill. App. 285 (Ill. App. Ct. 1949)
85 N.E.2d 862

Citing Cases

McWane Cast Iron Pipe Co v. Aetna Cas. Surety Co.

We further believe that the ruling of the trial court was correct, notwithstanding the fact that the…