Case Name: Nina Thomasson et al. Appellants, vs. The City of Chicago, Appellee; Sarah Lillian Phelps, Admx., Appellant, vs. The City of Chicago, Appellee; Harry S. Mecartney, Appellant, vs. The City of Chicago, Appellee
Court: Illinois Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1913-12-17
Citations: 261 Ill. 131
Docket Number: 
Parties: Nina Thomasson et al. Appellants, vs. The City of Chicago, Appellee.—Sarah Lillian Phelps, Admx., Appellant, vs. The City of Chicago, Appellee.—Harry S. Mecartney, Appellant, vs. The City of Chicago, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Reports
Volume: 261
Pages: 131–131

Head Matter:
Nina Thomasson et al. Appellants, vs. The City of Chicago, Appellee.—Sarah Lillian Phelps, Admx., Appellant, vs. The City of Chicago, Appellee.—Harry S. Mecartney, Appellant, vs. The City of Chicago, Appellee.
Opinion filed December 17, 1913.
This consolidated case is controlled by the decision in City of Chicago v. Thomasson, 259 Ill. 322.
AppEae from the Appellate Court for the First District ; — -heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Jesse A. Baedwin, Judge, presiding.
Richard W. Ceifford, and Enoch J. Price, for appellants.
Phieip J. McKenna, and Howard F. Bishop, (Wie-Eiam H. Sexton, Corporation Counsel, of counsel,) for appellee.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Carter
delivered the opinion of the court:
These three cases were consolidated in this court and heard as one case. Each of them came to this court by appeal .on a certificate of importance from the Appellate Court. The record in this consolidated case is in all essential particulars the same as that in City of Chicago v. Thomasson, 259 Ill. 322. The questions raised are identical with those raised in the case just cited. The decision in that case must control here.
The judgment of the Appellate Court must therefore be affirmed in each case.
Judgments affirmed.