{ "id": 5220854, "name": "RALPH MAGGETTE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PEOPLES GAS LIGHT AND COKE COMPANY, et al., Defendants-Appellees", "name_abbreviation": "Maggette v. Peoples Gas Light & Coke Co.", "decision_date": "1992-04-03", "docket_number": "No. 1\u201490\u20141977", "first_page": "180", "last_page": "182", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "228 Ill. App. 3d 180" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.", "id": 8837, "name": "Illinois Appellate Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 29, "name_long": "Illinois", "name": "Ill." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "579 N.E.2d 924", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.2d", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "219 Ill. App. 3d 418", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d", "case_ids": [ 5799245 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-app-3d/219/0418-01" ] }, { "cite": "545 N.E.2d 689", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.2d", "weight": 2, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "695" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "131 Ill. 2d 183", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 5569745 ], "weight": 2, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "195" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/131/0183-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 280, "char_count": 3506, "ocr_confidence": 0.771, "pagerank": { "raw": 5.676830387708631e-08, "percentile": 0.354147867308094 }, "sha256": "196699fa4587bfdc86706eeb65cb07862a251f99dd8dc0feefc5188ded911767", "simhash": "1:289a4734a921109d", "word_count": 556 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:00:32.943049+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "RALPH MAGGETTE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PEOPLES GAS LIGHT AND COKE COMPANY, et al., Defendants-Appellees." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "PRESIDING JUSTICE McNULTY\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nPlaintiff Ralph Maggette was injured on September 20, 1982, when the street pavement on which he was driving suddenly collapsed. He filed suit against Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company (Peoples Gas), alleging their negligence in performing prior work at the site of the occurrence. The trial court awarded summary judgment to Peoples Gas on July 13, 1989, and on June 21, 1990, denied plaintiff\u2019s motion for reconsideration. Plaintiff now appeals both the grant of summary judgment and the subsequent denial of his claim for reconsideration.\nAssuming, arguendo, that the initial grant of summary judgment for defendant was not in error, we turn to plaintiff\u2019s contention that the denial of his request for reconsideration was inappropriate. In granting defendant\u2019s motion for summary judgment, the trial judge stated:\n\u201cCounsel, if you can come up with any evidence that the hole they dug over here caused this \u2014 the ground under this one to come out, I will be happy to reconsider it. But you have thirty (30) days to do it. Okay.\u201d\nThereafter, the plaintiff filed a timely motion to reconsider, attaching the affidavit of his expert witness. At this time, defendant urged the court to consider the opinion of our supreme court in Delgatto v. Brandon Associates, Inc. (1989), 131 Ill. 2d 183, 545 N.E.2d 689, which held that an expert affidavit first introduced in a motion for reconsideration \u201cshould not be allowed in the absence of a reasonable explanation why it was not available at the time of the original hearing.\u201d (Delgatto, 131 Ill. 2d at 195, 545 N.E.2d at 695.) Notwithstanding the fact that he had previously told plaintiff that he would consider additional evidence if filed within 30 days, the trial judge relied upon Delgatto and struck the expert affidavit. Without the expert affidavit the plaintiff\u2019s motion for reconsideration had no supporting evidence, so it was denied.\nWithout departing from the authority established by Delgatto, we find that the trial judge\u2019s comments at the hearing on the motion for summary judgment were equivalent to an order granting leave to amend, and unambiguously invited the subsequent refiling of plaintiff\u2019s motion for reconsideration with supporting affidavit. (See Romo v. Allin Express Service, Inc. (1991), 219 Ill. App. 3d 418, 579 N.E.2d 924 (in which we found that the trial judge\u2019s denial of a section 2 \u2014 1401 petition (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1987, ch. 110, par. 2\u2014 1401) \u201cwithout prejudice\u201d was substantially similar to an order granting leave to amend, and as such provided the authority for plaintiff to file a second such petition).) In the instant action, plaintiff\u2019s counsel relied upon the trial judge\u2019s \u201cinvitation\u201d to conduct additional discovery and present the resulting expert affidavit. To deny his resulting efforts is both legally unsound and undeniably unjust. We therefore reverse the trial court\u2019s orders striking the expert affidavit and denying plaintiff\u2019s motion for reconsideration, and remand this cause with directions to consider plaintiff\u2019s claims anew.\nReversed and remanded.\nMURRAY and GORDON, JJ., concur.", "type": "majority", "author": "PRESIDING JUSTICE McNULTY" } ], "attorneys": [ "Robert J. Austin and Sam Cuba, both of Jeffrey D. Schultz, of Chicago, for appellant.", "Barbara Baran and Kevin J.P. O\u2019Hara, both of Ross & Hardies, of Chicago, for appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "RALPH MAGGETTE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PEOPLES GAS LIGHT AND COKE COMPANY, et al., Defendants-Appellees.\nFirst District (5th Division)\nNo. 1\u201490\u20141977\nOpinion filed April 3, 1992.\nRobert J. Austin and Sam Cuba, both of Jeffrey D. Schultz, of Chicago, for appellant.\nBarbara Baran and Kevin J.P. O\u2019Hara, both of Ross & Hardies, of Chicago, for appellee." }, "file_name": "0180-01", "first_page_order": 200, "last_page_order": 202 }