Summary
In Kraegel v. Daros, 333 Ill. App. 651, (abstract) the court had before it a parallel state of facts, except that, instead of allowing a motion for judgment based on failure to deny the affirmative defense, the trial court after hearing the motion allowed the plaintiff's motion for a non-suit.
Summary of this case from Branom v. MillerOpinion
Gen. No. 44,153. (Abstract of Decision.)
Opinion filed February 25, 1948 Released for publication March 25, 1948
DISCONTINUANCE, DISMISSAL AND NONSUIT, § 23 — tardy taking of nonsuit. In action, in municipal court of Chicago, against business brokers for amount claimed to be owing by them to plaintiff as result of transaction between parties, where written defense, filed by one of defendants, containing new affirmative matters, was admitted by plaintiff's failure to reply thereto, after court sustained motion of defendant, who filed defense, to effect that matters alleged by him were admitted, plaintiff was not entitled to take voluntary nonsuit and to dismissal of action without prejudice, but defendant, who alleged new matters, was entitled to judgment against plaintiff.
See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.
Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. HAROLD P. O'CONNELL, Judge, presiding.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded with directions. Heard in the third division, first district, this court at the October term, 1947.
Allen Darlington, for appellants;
Glynn J. Elliott, of counsel;
No appearance for appellee.
Not to be published in full. Opinion filed February 25, 1948; released for publication March 25, 1948.