Watson v. Reissig
Illinois Supreme Court
This was a motion, on the part of defendant in error, to set aside and vacate an entry of satisfaction of two judgments in favor of Reissig.
Read the full summary
This was a motion, on the part of defendant in error, to set aside and vacate an entry of satisfaction of two judgments in favor of Reissig. The bill of exceptions in the cause of Charles Reissig against Alonzo Watson and Peter Northrop, in the Circuit Court of Cook county, states, that.a judgment by confession was entered on a note and warrant of attorney, on the 29th September, 1857, for $758.81 damages, besides costs, in the above entitled cause, A. C. Coventry, attorney for the plaintiff, on the record, L. B. Taft, attorney for defendants, on the record. The first execution, a writ of…
1Opinion of the Court
Catón, C. J.
The law is too well settled to admit of discussion, that a court of law may exercise an equitable jurisdiction over the execution of its own judgments and process, but it does not follow that it will always exercise such jurisdiction, and indeed it will refrain from doing so, when, from any circumstance, it cannot do as complete justice as could a court of equity, but will leave the parties to seek relief in that court. We shall see whether this record presented such a case as justified the court of law in exercising such an equitable jurisdiction.
The objection which is urged to…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Cities Service Oil Co. v. Village of Oak BrookAppellate Court of Illinois · 1980
- Pellston Planing Mill & Lumber Co. v. Van WormerMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
- Irwin v. BeggsColorado Court of Appeals · 1913
- Vinson v. Norfolk & W. R'y Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1893
- Chittenden v. RogersIllinois Supreme Court · 1866
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.