U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, 1941

Guthard v. Sanitary District of Chicago

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Decided March 27, 1941 · Sparks

118 F.2d 899; 49 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 128; 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4130 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Ernst Buehler, Edmund D. Adcock, Ralph M. Snyder, all of Chicago, 111., Arthur C. Denison, of Cleveland, Ohio, and Wallace R. Lane, of Chicago, 111., for appellant., Lynn A. Williams, of Chicago, 111., for appellees.

Cases that cite this one

5 later published cases cite this decision.

Pleune v. Pierce (District Court, E.D. New York 1988)
Local 2816, Office of Economic Opportunity Employees Union, AFGE, AFL-CIO v. Phillips (District Court, N.D. Illinois 1973)
United States Travel Agency, Inc. v. World-Wide Travel Service Corp. (D.C. 1967)
Community Counselling Service, Incorporated v. Robert Benedict Reilly (4th Cir. 1963)
Activated Sludge v. Sanitary Dist. of Chicago (District Court, N.D. Illinois 1946)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

SPARKS, Circuit Judge.

This appeal is from an order of the District Court denying leave to defendant to file a petition to set aside, vacate and reopen an interlocutory decree of February 8, 1935. That decree was affirmed by this court June 16, 1937. Sanitary District of Chicago v. Activated Sludge, 7 Cir., 90 F.2d 727. On January 20, 1940, this court, on defendant’s petition in the original cause, granted permission for defendant to petition the District Court for leave to file the petition here involved. The District Court after hearing voluminous, evidence denied leave to file such petition, and from that order this appeal is prosecuted.

Accompanying this order the District Court filed its written opinion (33 F.Supp. 692) in which it set forth the pertinent facts at length, and decided every question presented here in accordance with our views. To rewrite them would only encumber the record and the printed reports.

The order is affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.