# Miller v. National Ass'n of Realtors

> Appellate Court of Illinois · March 31, 1995 · 271 Ill. App. 3d 653

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9544523

## Case

- **Full name:** THEODORE RANDALL MILLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, Defendant-Appellee and Third-Party Plaintiff (Arthur Rubloff and Company, Third-Party Defendant)
- **Court:** Appellate Court of Illinois
- **Decided:** March 31, 1995
- **Citations:** 271 Ill. App. 3d 653; 207 Ill. Dec. 642; 648 N.E.2d 98
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Rizzi
- **Judges:** Tully, Greiman, Rizzi
- **Cited by:** 18 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9544523

## Opinion text

JUSTICE RIZZI specially concurs:
I write this specially concurring opinion to address the dissent. In any opinion, when the factual discussion in the dissent is compared to the factual discussion in the majority opinion, it demonstrates quite clearly that this case presents factual questions to be determined by a trier of fact and not by arrogating or pontificating judges.
In addition, in view of the statements that appear in the dissent, I wish to clearly state that neither the author of the majority opinion nor myself believe that we have "obliquely” made a "different policy choice” from the legislature or the supreme court regarding the entry of summary judgments. Nor are we "merely reversing summary judgments properly entered.” Moreover, neither the author of the majority opinion nor myself are "routinely turning our backs” on summary judgment orders, and we are not sending "a message to the courts below that they should not waste their time or agony on these motions.” Instead, the author of the majority opinion and I are not sending any message whatsoever by reversing the summary judgment in this case. We merely feel that the summary judgment that was entered should be reversed for the reasons stated in the majority opinion. What concerns me, however, is that the dissent may be sending a message to the courts below encouraging summary judgments. Summary judgments should neither be encouraged nor discouraged, but rather should be entered only in cases where warranted, dependent on the facts in each case.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9544523. Public record. Not legal advice.