First Congregational Church of Harvard v. Page

• Decision Date: 08 October 1912
• Citation: 99 N.E. 453,255 Ill. 267
• Parties: FIRST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH OF HARVARD v. PAGE et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

255 Ill. 267

99 N.E. 453

FIRST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH OF HARVARD

v.PAGE et al.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Oct. 8, 1912.

Action by the First Congregational Church of Harvard against William Page and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. On motion to dismiss. Appeal dismissed.

David R. Joslyn and E. H. Waite, both of Woodstock, for appellants.

Calvin J. Hendricks, of Harvard, for appellee.

HAND, J.

This is a motion made by appellee to dismiss this appeal, on the ground that appellants have not complied with the order of court in perfecting the appeal, in this: That the appeal prayed for and allowed was joint, while the appeal bond filed was signed by only one of the appellants.

[1] It has been repeatedly held by this court that the right of appeal is purely statutory, and that a party, to avail himself of such a right, must strictly comply with the order of the court granting the appeal, and when a joint appeal is prayed and allowed, all the appellants must sign the appeal bond, or the appeal, on motion, will be dismissed. Hileman v. Beale, 115 Ill. 355, 5 N. E. 108;Tedrick v. Wells, 152 Ill. 214, 38 N. E. 625;Town v. Howieson, 175 Ill. 85, 51 N. E. 712;Ellison v. Hammond, 189 Ill. 470, 59 N. E. 966;Fortune v. Gilbert, 207 Ill. 235, 69 N. E. 857.

[2] It has also been held that, where a joint appeal has been prayed and allowed, if the appeal bond is signed by only one of the appellants, the appeal must be dismissed, and that the defect in perfecting the appeal cannot be cured by filing a new appeal bond in this court, which is signed by all the appellants. Tedrick v. Wells, supra; Ellison v. Hammond, supra.

[3] An order was made in this case, subsequent to the granting of the appeal, which provided that a bond signed by one of the defendants, with good and sufficient surety, would be sufficient. This order was without avail to save the appeal, as the court was powerless to authorize one defendant to file an appeal bond for his codefendants after a joint appeal had been granted.

It is thought the case of Hammond v. People, 164 Ill. 455, 46 N. E. 796, authorizes the filing of a new appeal bond in this court, and thereby avoid the necessity of dismissing the appeal. That case is in conflict with later holdings of this court, and must be deemed to have been overruled.

[4]The appellants have asked that the attempted appeal be treated as a writ of error. This cannot be done. Cases can be found where a defective appeal has...