Greed corp unable to launch 3d
It's quite obvious that they'd rather develop all their land commercially for more profits rather than do a civic deed for the community. It's just that some people show characteristics of pure greed with Bernstein, Schwinge and Andreani no exceptions. I am confident that the park district made a reasonable offer to the developers.
NORTHBROOK - In regards to the Lake Northbrook Leisure Park, it is a disgrace that the village of Northbrook has to go to court to get a few acres of badly needed park land from developers Joseph Bernstein, Herman Schwinge and Raymond Andreani [ "Resident hits developer greed in park hassle Hansen's letter, together with the headline supplied by Pioneer Press, read as follows: While the condemnation proceedings were pending, the letter written by Hansen appeared in the June 13, 1974, edition of the Northbrook Star, a weekly newspaper owned and published by Pioneer Press. A "disagreement" arose between plaintiffs and the park district concerning the fair market value of the property, and the park district instituted condemnation proceedings in the circuit court of Cook County. In 1969, plaintiffs were the beneficial owners of property which the Northbrook Park District sought to acquire for a leisure park project. Plaintiffs are builders and real estate developers. The order dismissing those counts is not involved in this appeal.)
#Greed corp unable to launch 3d trial
(The trial court earlier had granted defendants' motion to dismiss counts III and IV of the complaint which alleged a conspiracy to injure plaintiffs' reputations and to influence certain condemnation proceedings. The trial court granted defendants' motion to dismiss both counts of the complaint and plaintiffs appeal. The action was for statements contained in a letter to the editor written by Hansen and published in the Northbrook Star by Pioneer Press. Hansen and Pioneer Press, Inc., an Illinois corporation. Bernstein, brought an action for libel and invasion of privacy against defendants, Douglas W. JUSTICE McNAMARA delivered the opinion of the court: The order dismissing those counts is not involved in this appeal.) Go to It is not necessary that persons actively seek publicity in order to be found to be in the "public eye." Beresky v. 1537.) The negotiations between plaintiffs and the park district as well as the pending condemnation proceedings placed plaintiffs in the midst of the public controversy surrounding the land acquisition.
(See Greenbelt Cooperative Publishing Association v.
4 The park district's attempt to acquire the real estate owned by plaintiffs for a public project was a matter of legitimate public interest and concern.This approach comports with other first amendment holdings designed to insure "uninhibited, robust and wide-open" discussion of legitimate public issues. 534, the supreme court viewed the right of privacy narrowly when balanced against the publication of a matter of public interest. Perk Dog Food Co.) In Leopold, the court observed that in Time, Inc. 293, 106 N.E.2d 742.) While the right of privacy enjoys protection of law under some circumstances, this right is a limited one in areas of legitimate public interest. The right of privacy and the right to redress the invasion of such right have been recognized in Illinois.App.2d 53, 223 N.E.2d 419.) Whether the language is susceptible of an innocent construction is a question of law to be resolved by the court by reading the words stripped of innuendo. 149.) Under the rule, the headline must be read together with the body of the letter. The rule directs that the writing "be read as a whole and the words given their natural and obvious meaning, and requires that words allegedly libelous that are capable of being read innocently must be so read and declared nonactionable as a matter of law." ( John v. 2 Illinois courts apply the "innocent construction rule" in determining whether writings are libelous.