Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

6 Ill. App. 3d 537

Theobault-Olson Co. v. Petta

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided June 30, 1972

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1972-06-30

Relies on 23 Ill. App. 2d 507 - Pinkstaff v. the Pennsylvania R. Co. · 340 Ill. App. 330 - Jones v. City of Carterville

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1972-06-30

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently November 2025

7 state decisions

40197219801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION ON DENIAL OF PETITION FOR REHEARING

Mr. JUSTICE DRUCKER

¶2delivered the opinion of the court:

¶3In its petition for rehearing, plaintiff seeks to contradict the record it filed in this court. An affidavit of plaintiff’s counsel alleges that a written motion to vacate the judgment and for a new trial as to all defendants was filed on April 7, 1971; that at the hearing on April 28 the motion was withdrawn as to all defendants except Sheriff Woods; that the trial judge physically removed plaintiff’s post-trial motion from the file and gave no explanation therefor; that he refused to make any written findings as to his reason for denying the post-trial motion, and that his denial of the motion to vacate the judgment and for a new trial referred to the written motion filed on April 7, 1971. However, the court’s half sheet memorandum which plaintiff made part of the record does not show the filing of such a motion on April 7, whereas it does include the following entry for April 28, 1971: “Oral motion to vacate Judg of 3 — 11—71 and for new trial as to def. Sheriff of Cook County — Denied. Mot. to file written motion denied — Document presented is not a motion.”

¶4The plaintiffs praecipe for record did not request a written motion of April 7,1971.

¶5 We are bound by the certified record. (Jones v. City of Carterville, 340 Ill.App. 330, 91 N.E.2d 604.) Reports of proceedings may not be contradicted by affidavits of counsel. Pinkstaff v. The Pennsylvania R.R. Co., 23 Ill.App.2d 507, 507 — 11, 163 N.E.2d 728.

¶6We must therefore adhere to our opinion and deny the petition for rehearing.

¶7Petition for rehearing denied.

¶8LORENZ, P. J., and ENGLISH, J., concur.

/6/illapp3d/537 · .json · Public domain