Adams v. Bishop
Illinois Supreme Court
ERROR TO ADAMS. This was an action of ejectment brought to the March term, A. D. 1857, of the Adams Circuit Court, by plaintiff in error against the defendants in error, to recover the S. W. 32, Township 2 S., 8 *W\, in Adams county aforesaid. The declaration was in the usual form. Plea not guilty.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO ADAMS. This was an action of ejectment brought to the March term, A. D. 1857, of the Adams Circuit Court, by plaintiff in error against the defendants in error, to recover the S. W. 32, Township 2 S., 8 *W\, in Adams county aforesaid. The declaration was in the usual form. Plea not guilty. On the 19th November, 1857, at October term, 1857, of said court, the cause was tried by consent, without a jury, before Sibley, Judge, and the court found the issue for defendants in error, and rendered a judgment against plaintiff in error, for costs, whereupon, at time of said trial, plaintiff…
1Opinion of the CourtBreese, J.
The design of the first section of the act of 1829 (Laws 1829, p. 24), is, manifestly, to indicate officers competent to take the acknowledgment of deeds, in addition to those named in the 9th section of the act of eighteen hundred and twenty-seven (Laws 1827, p. 98). Thus we find in the first section, “ any commissioner,” judge of a Circuit Court, mayor of a city, notary public, and if executed out of the State, a justice of the peace, accompanied by a proper certificate of his official character. These officers are not named in the 9th section of the act of 1827. In taking acknowledgments,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Lasoya Oil Co. v. ZulkeySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- Logan v. WilliamsIllinois Supreme Court · 1875