Saskill v. 4-B ACCEPTANCE

How courts have described this case

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

• a question of fact concerning the intent of the parties is “determined by the nature and substance of the transaction rather than its form, to insure against evasion of the statute by a party’s ingenious scheme or device.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Andrews v. Cramer
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1993-12-30· cited 54×
• Buttitta v. Newell
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1988-11-23· cited 14×
• Saskill v. 4-B ACCEPTANCE
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1985-12-11· cited 8×
• Western Nat. Bank of Cicero v. Moenning
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1991-12-20· cited 5×
• Northern Trust Co. v. Bernardi
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1985-10-30· cited 2×
• Jackson v. Payday Financial, LLC
  N.D. Illinois· 2015-02-03· cited 2×
• Gillivan v. Austin
  Virgin Islands· 1986-08-21· cited 1×

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Greene v. City of Chicago
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1978-10-06· cited 138×
• People Ex Rel. Scott v. Schwulst Building Center, Inc.
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1982-02-02· cited 51×
• Merchandise Nat'l Bk. of Chicago v. Scanlon
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1980-07-08· cited 37×
• Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Jensen
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1933-07-05· cited 8×
• Jones & Brown, Inc. v. W. E. Erickson Construction Co.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1979-07-02· cited 6×
• Firebaugh v. Seegren
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1932-02-29· cited 6×
• Dobie v. Livengood
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1989-10-25· cited 4×