Carr v. Miner
Illinois Supreme Court
This cause came to this court by appeal. The appellant moved for a rule upon the appellee to join in error. A" cross motion was entered to dismiss the appeal, upon the ground that the judgment appealed from was in favor" of the party taking the appeal. In opposition to the cross motion, the act of February 16, 1865. Sess. Acts, p. 3, was cited, as showing that an appeal will lie in all cases in which a writ of error may be prosecuted.
1Per curiam
We have often decided that under the law as it existed prior to the passage of the act cited, a party could not prosecute an appeal from a judgment which was in his favor. If a successful party was dissatisfied with his judgment, the only mode by which he could have the case reviewed in this court was by writ of error. Addix v. Fahnestock, 15 Ill. 448; Roth v. Smith, MSS. April Term, 1864. The act of 1865, cited by the appellant, while it allows appeals to be prosecuted from all judgments upon which a writ of error may be sued out, will not help the case at bar. That act is prospective only…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Addix v. FahnestockIllinois Supreme Court · 1854
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hall v. Pay Rock Consolidated Mining Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1881
- Rolater v. StrainSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Kepler v. RinehartIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
- Jackman v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1917
- Mester Coal Co. v. PopeAppellate Court of Illinois · 1910