Hassell v. Wenglinski

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the plaintiff, an employee of the defendant, was an “owner” under the Act when she was injured while walking the defendant’s dog
• holding that the plaintiff, an employee of the defendant, was an “owner” under the Act when she was injured while walking the defendant’s dog
• dog owner not liable for injuries to person who was walking dog as favor to the owner
• dog owner not liable for injuries to person who was walking dog as favor to the owner
• dog owner not liable for injuries to person walking dog as favor to owner

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Meyer v. Naperville Manner, Inc.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1994-05-17· cited 57×
• Eyrich v. Johnson
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1996-05-16· cited 19×
• Carl v. Resnick
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1999-03-31· cited 18×
• VanPlew v. Riccio
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2000-11-17· cited 11×
• Docherty v. Sadler
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1997-12-31· cited 11×
• Scollard v. Williams
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2023-03-16· cited 2×
• Kent v. Block
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2001-03-27· cited 1×
• Frost v. Robave, Inc.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1998-04-21
• Carl v. Resnick Modification of Mar. 31, 1999
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1999-07-28

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Harris v. Walker
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1988-02-11· cited 108×
• Wilcoxen v. Paige
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1988-09-16· cited 45×
• Vanderlei v. Heideman
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1980-04-15· cited 31×
• Clark v. Rogers
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1985-10-07· cited 23×
• Ennen v. White
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1992-08-13· cited 13×