Snell v. Stanley
Illinois Supreme Court
Appeal from the Circuit Court of DeWitt county; the Hon. Thos. F. Tipton, Judge, presiding. This was a suit in chancery to foreclose a mortgage. On the back of the summons was this writing: “I hereby acknowledge service of the within summons, and authorize Messrs. Moore & Warner to enter my appearance in the within case. Springfield, III., Sept. 9, 1871. C. D. Harvey, assignee for Henry Tyler.” The signature of Harvey was proved in court, and Messrs.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of DeWitt county; the Hon. Thos. F. Tipton, Judge, presiding. This was a suit in chancery to foreclose a mortgage. On the back of the summons was this writing: “I hereby acknowledge service of the within summons, and authorize Messrs. Moore & Warner to enter my appearance in the within case. Springfield, III., Sept. 9, 1871. C. D. Harvey, assignee for Henry Tyler.” The signature of Harvey was proved in court, and Messrs. Moore & Warner, solicitors for the complainant, also entered the appearance of Harvey, the solicitor for the other defendants protesting against…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Breese
This was a bill in chancery to foreclose a mortgage. All the parties interested had notice of the pendency of the suit by actual service of process, or by an acknowledgment of service.
There was a demurrer to the bill, which was overruled. The point is made here that the appearance of Harvey, one of the defendants, was entered by the counsel for complainant. The record shows Harvey acknowledged service on the back of the summons more than a month before the return day, and in the writing of acknowledgment he authorized Messrs. Moore & Warner, the counsel for complainant, to enter his…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Vayette v. MyersIllinois Supreme Court · 1922
- Reagan v. ReaganAppellate Court of Illinois · 1974