Legal Opinion

Muller v. Balke

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided June 8, 1897PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from the Appellate Court for the First District;—heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. E. F. Dunne, Judge, presiding.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Appellate Court for the First District;—heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. E. F. Dunne, Judge, presiding. This is an appeal from the judgment of the Appellate Court for the First District affirming a judgment of the circuit court of Cook county, entered in a forcible entry and detainer proceeding brought by the appellee, Emma Balke, against the appellant, Sophie Muller, to recover possession of certain property located at No. 63 Cleveland street, in the city of Chicago. Edward Muller, on and prior to the 20th of December, 1889, was…

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Craig

It is contended by appellant in the argument: First, that to maintain this form of action under the statute, proof of an actual possession—one pedis possessio—by Edward Muller when he executed the deed of trust was necessary, and that a constructive possession by tenant was insufficient; second, that, the action of forcible detainer being a possessory one, the question of the devolution of title under the trust deed could not be litigated in it; and third, that under a correct construction of the deed of trust appellee acquired no title whatever.

The sixth clause of section 2 of chapter 57 of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Jackson v. WarrenIllinois Supreme Court · 1863
  2. Coleman v. BillingsIllinois Supreme Court · 1878
  3. Hubbard v. KiddoIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
  4. Muller v. BalkeIllinois Supreme Court · 1895

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hegberg v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912
  2. Colburn v. GilcrestSupreme Court of Colorado · 1915
  3. Knox v. HunterAppellate Court of Illinois · 1909
  4. Goldblatt Bros. v. Hoefeld, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1936
  5. Mott v. ScanlanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912

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

Powered by the Exa API