Skip to main content
· 12/21/1995

XL Disposal Corp. v. John Sexton Contractors Co.

Citations

  • 659 N.E.2d 1312
  • 213 Ill. Dec. 665
  • 168 Ill. 2d 355
  • 1995 Ill. LEXIS 220

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that an agreement in which one party promised to make monthly payments to the other party’s attorney as part of an asset sale contract was for the direct benefit of the attorney
  • holding that an agreement in which one party promised to make monthly payments to the other party’s attorney as part of an asset sale contract was for the direct benefit of the attorney
  • finding that an attorney who was not a named party to a contract was an intended third-party beneficiary because the contract specified he would receive payments

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Freeman, Bilandic, Harrison

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.