From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tegtmeyer v. Sun Indemnity Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois, Chicago, First District
Feb 28, 1944
321 Ill. App. 642 (Ill. App. Ct. 1944)

Opinion

Gen. No. 42,838. (Abstract of Decision.)

Opinion filed February 28, 1944

PLEADING, § 256necessity of presenting desired amendment to court. Court's refusal to vacate order dismissing suit on defendant's motion, thus preventing plaintiff, as alleged by her, from filing secondly amended statement of claim," was not error, when no copy of proposed "secondly amended statement" or showing as to its contents was presented to court and there were no means for determining whether or not desired amendment would be sufficient to state good cause of action.

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

Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. JOHN R. MCSWEENEY, Judge, presiding.

Affirmed. Heard in the first division, first district, this court at the October term, 1943.

Herbert M. Wetzel, for appellant;

Charles E. Selleek, of counsel;

McKenna Harris, for appellee;

James J. McKenna and Henry H. Koven, of counsel.


Not to be published in full. Opinion filed February 28, 1944.


Summaries of

Tegtmeyer v. Sun Indemnity Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois, Chicago, First District
Feb 28, 1944
321 Ill. App. 642 (Ill. App. Ct. 1944)
Case details for

Tegtmeyer v. Sun Indemnity Co.

Case Details

Full title:Daisy C. Tegtmeyer, Appellant, v. Sun Indemnity Company of New York…

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois, Chicago, First District

Date published: Feb 28, 1944

Citations

321 Ill. App. 642 (Ill. App. Ct. 1944)
53 N.E.2d 487

Citing Cases

Sarelas v. Illinois Bell Tel. Co.

"A party is not entitled as of right to file an amended pleading, and a party so desiring should prepare and…