Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Warren v. Meeker

6 Ill. App. 3d 514 (Ill. App. Ct. 1972)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Warren v. Meeker

2 Citing cases

  1. Warren v. Meeker

    302 N.E.2d 54 (Ill. 1973)   Cited 34 times
    In Warren v. Meeker (1973), 55 Ill.2d 108, this court affirmed the dismissal of a complaint since the allegations did not show that the defendant was a person in charge of the operation which involved the violation from which the injury arose.

    The complaint was dismissed upon defendants' motions. The appellate court affirmed, holding that plaintiff's activity did not place him within the purview of the Act ( Warren v. Meeker, 6 Ill. App.3d 514), and we granted leave to appeal. The issue presented is whether the complaint was sufficient to state a cause of action under the aforementioned statute. The complaint in substance alleged that plaintiff, LeRoy Warren, was employed by defendant, Harold Davis, on the date of the accident (February 27, 1969); that located on Davis' property was a grain silo constructed August, 1967, under the control and supervision of Davis and the co-defendant, Donald Meeker, d/b/a Meeker bins (hereinafter Meeker); that the silo was leased from Meeker to Davis; that Davis was in charge of the silo on the date of the accident; that plaintiff in order to repair a part of the silo known as a "sweeping auger," which was temporarily not functioning "due to a failure in its power supply hookup," ascended a ladder which had been permanently attached to the silo at the time of its construction; that this ladder had been erected, inter alia, for use in repair of the silo; that a rung gave way causing him to

  2. Bitner v. Lester B. Knight Assocs

    307 N.E.2d 136 (Ill. App. Ct. 1974)   Cited 14 times
    In Bitner v. Lester B. Knight Associates, Inc. (1974), 16 Ill. App.3d 857, 862, the plaintiff was an electrician who was merely performing maintenance on a conveyor system which had been erected a year earlier and was not involved in a construction activity.

    In fact it is clear that he was an electrician employed by Caterpillar and at the time of the accident he was "coding" conveyor buckets. A factual situation quite similar to the one which we are considering appeared in the case of Warren v. Meeker, 6 Ill. App.3d 514, 285 N.E.2d 521. In Warren the plaintiff fell from a ladder attached to a grain silo which had been constructed approximately a year and a half before the accident by the defendant Meeker on the property of the defendant Davis, who was a farmer.