From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Ruskin v. Rodgers
Illinois Appellate Court
79 Ill.App.3d 941, 35 Ill.Dec. 557, 399 N.E.2d 623 (1979)
- Written by Samantha Arena, JD
Facts
Ruskin (plaintiff) brought suit against Rodgers (defendant) for specific performance of an agreement. Ruskin prevailed and Rodgers appealed, contending that he did not receive a fair trial based on the trial court’s denial of his motions for: (1) a continuance two days prior to the set trial date, and (2) substitution of attorneys during cross examination of the first witness. Specifically, Rodgers argued that a party has an absolute right to replace his attorney at any time and for any reason.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
