Legal Opinion

Gage v. Smith

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1875PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Samuel M. Moore, Judge, presiding. Appellees filed their bill in chancery, in the office of the clerk of the Superior Court of Cook county, alleging that at the November term, 1874, of the Superior Court, they obtained a judgment against appellant for §1486.14; that on the ISth day of November, 1874, an execution was issued thereon to the sheriff of Cook county, which was returned by him on the 23d day of December,…

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Samuel M. Moore, Judge, presiding. Appellees filed their bill in chancery, in the office of the clerk of the Superior Court of Cook county, alleging that at the November term, 1874, of the Superior Court, they obtained a judgment against appellant for §1486.14; that on the ISth day of November, 1874, an execution was issued thereon to the sheriff of Cook county, which was returned by him on the 23d day of December, 1874, unsatisfied, and that the judgment is still in force. It is further alleged, that on or about January 1st, 1874,…

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Scholfield

We are of opinion the sufficiency of the affidavit to the bill to authorize a preliminary decree for injunction and the appointment of a receiver, is not properly before us. No such use was made of it. Appellant appeared and demurred to the bill, and, upon the demurrer being overruled, he refused to answer further, whereupon the court rendered a decree pro confesso; and the only question is, therefore, whether the allegations of the bill are sufficient to authorize the decree.

The forty-ninth section of the Chancery Code (R. L. 1874, p. 203-4,) provides, “ whenever an execution shall have been…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Rigg v. WiltonIllinois Supreme Court · 1851
  2. Corning & Norton v. WhiteNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
  3. Bloodgood v. ClarkNew York Court of Chancery · 1834
  4. Austin v. FigueiraNew York Court of Chancery · 1838

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Fish v. FarwellIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Phoenix Title & Trust Co. v. Old Dominion Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Siegmund v. AscherAppellate Court of Illinois · 1890
  4. Hudson v. King Bros.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1887
  5. Pittsburgh Equitable Meter Co. v. Paul C. Loeber & Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1947

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API