Pardon v. Dwire
Illinois Supreme Court
Appellees brought ejectment against appellant and one Garret 0. Milum, for recovery of Lot 4, Block 3, west of public square, in Sublett’s addition to the town of Lebanon, St. Clair county..
Read the full summary
Appellees brought ejectment against appellant and one Garret 0. Milum, for recovery of Lot 4, Block 3, west of public square, in Sublett’s addition to the town of Lebanon, St. Clair county.. Appellant only served, who plead the general issue and appeals} singly, by leave. • The c.atise "fwas tried by the court, Snyder, Judge, by consent. - On the trial,-the following facts were agreed upon: 1. Plaintiffs are chil'drehbf Catharine Dwire and James Dwire. 2. That James Dwire died previous to June, 1848. 3. Both parties claim under Elbr'idge G. Potter. Appellees then introduced in evidence a deed…
1Opinion of the CourtCaton, C. J.
The appellant introduced a deed from Potter to Catharine Dwire, and afterwards objected to its being considered or treated as evidence in the cause, because the acknowledgment was not properly certified. By introducing the deed in evidence, he vouched to the court that it was genuine and properly executed by- the grantors, and was proper evidence to prove what it purported to prove, it having been introduced without reservation, explanation or qualification. He could not afterwards object that it was not properly executed.
The next question is, as to the effect of the judicial sale under which…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Jones v. CrimWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1909
- Johnson v. BakerIllinois Supreme Court · 1865
- Morris v. HogleIllinois Supreme Court · 1865
- State v. BaileyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1919
- Dawson v. BridgesAppellate Court of Illinois · 1886
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.