Legal Opinion

Raming v. Peyser

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided November 3, 1930No. Gen. No. 34,279PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Mr. Presiding Justice Hatchett

delivered the opinion of the court.

Plaintiffs in the trial court, who are appellants here, brought an action in replevin. There was a trial by the court and a finding for defendant with an order for a writ of retorno habendo, motions for a new trial and in arrest being overruled. Plaintiffs seek to reverse the judgment by this appeal.

Defendant in his brief urges a motion to dismiss the appeal, but he has not complied with Rule 15 of this court with reference thereto, and for that reason the motion will not be considered.

The property in controversy is a Chevrolet…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. People v. StokesIllinois Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Jaques v. StewartSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
  3. Adamson v. WigginsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
  4. Manufacturers Finance Trust v. StoneAppellate Court of Illinois · 1929
  5. Davis v. TandyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Smetal Corporation v. Family Loan Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1935
  2. Solomon v. DunneAppellate Court of Illinois · 1932
  3. Turk v. BenderAppellate Court of Illinois · 1933
  4. Winnick v. Aetna Acceptance Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1934
  5. People v. MorseAppellate Court of Illinois · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API