KEATING v. CITY OF CHICAGO, 21 N.E.3d 465 (2014)
Court: Supreme Court of Illinois
Number: inilco20141120281
Visitors: 5
Filed: Nov. 20, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 20, 2014
Summary: OPINION PER CURIAM : 1 In this case, two Justices of this Court have recused themselves and the remaining members of the Court are divided so that it is not possible to secure the constitutionally required concurrence of four judges for a decision (see Ill. Const. 1970, art. VI, 3). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The effect of this dismissal is the same as an affirmance by an equally divided court of the decision under review but is of no precedential value. See Perlman v. First
Summary: OPINION PER CURIAM : 1 In this case, two Justices of this Court have recused themselves and the remaining members of the Court are divided so that it is not possible to secure the constitutionally required concurrence of four judges for a decision (see Ill. Const. 1970, art. VI, 3). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The effect of this dismissal is the same as an affirmance by an equally divided court of the decision under review but is of no precedential value. See Perlman v. First N..
More
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
¶ 1 In this case, two Justices of this Court have recused themselves and the remaining members of the Court are divided so that it is not possible to secure the constitutionally required concurrence of four judges for a decision (see Ill. Const. 1970, art. VI, § 3). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The effect of this dismissal is the same as an affirmance by an equally divided court of the decision under review but is of no precedential value. See Perlman v. First National Bank of Chicago, 60 Ill.2d 529, 530, 331 N.E.2d 65 (1975).
¶ 2 KARMEIER and BURKE, JJ., took no part.
Source: Leagle
