Murphy v. Chicago Transit Authority

How courts have described this case

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

• \section 41 puts the burden upon the claimant to ascertain her rights and to comply with the statutory prerequisites for maintaining a lawsuit against the CTA\
• “section 41 puts the burden upon the claimant to ascertain her rights and to comply with the statutory prerequisites for maintaining a lawsuit against the CTA”
• court held that plaintiffs counsel could not rely on vague assertions by the claims representative that “everything was okay” and would be taken care of, but was required to take steps to ensure that his client’s interests were safeguarded
• court held that plaintiff's counsel could not rely on vague assertions by the claims representative that \everything was okay\ and would be taken care of, but was required to take steps to ensure that his client's interests were safeguarded

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).