Anderson v. Chicago & E.I. Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 21 March 1944
• Docket Number: No. 27849.,27849.
• Citation: 53 N.E.2d 921,386 Ill. 239
• Parties: PEOPLE ex rel. ANDERSON, County Collector, v. CHICAGO & E. I. RY. CO.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

386 Ill. 239

53 N.E.2d 921

PEOPLE ex rel. ANDERSON, County Collector,

v.CHICAGO & E. I. RY. CO.

No. 27849.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

March 21, 1944.

Proceedings by the People, on the relation of Claude Anderson, Tax Collector, against Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railway Company for judgment and order of sale of defendant's land for taxes alleged to be delinquent. From a judgment by default for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

Reversed and remanded.Appeal from Moultrie County Court; Glen R. Cooper, Judge.

Robert F. White and J. L. McLaughlin, both of Sullivan, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

THOMPSON, Justice.

This appeal assails what is referred to in the notice of appeal as a purported judgment of the county court of Moultrie county purporting to fix the correct amount of taxes due from the Chicago and Eastern Illinois Railway Company, and from an order of said court allowing a motion to strike appellant's objections, and an order denying appellant's motion for leave to file said objections and have a hearing on their merits. Appellant, Chicago and Eastern Illinois Railway Company, seeks to have the purported judgment, which was entered by default, vacated and to have said objections filed and set for hearing.

The facts are not in dispute. The county treasurer and ex-officio county collector, on September 28, 1943, presented to the court the tax judgment, sale, redemption and forfeiture record, and asked for judgment. On the People's motion the court entered a rule that all objections be filed by one o'clock P. M. on that day. At one o'clock on that day a default judgment was entered against ‘all persons interested in any lands and lots mentioned in the aforesaid application’ not having their objections on file. The court's order recited that ‘it appearing to the court from the certification of publication on file in said cause,’ due notice has been given of the collector's intention to file application for judgment and order of sale ‘against the aforesaid delinquent lands, town and city lots and railroads,’ etc. Objections of various railroads, other than appellant, were on file and were either considered or a hearing thereon set for a future date. It was ordered and tered against the ‘aforesaid tract or tracts tered against the ‘aforesaid trtcat or tracts or lots of land or parts of tracts or lots,’ and that so much thereof as shall be sufficient to satisfy the amount of taxes, etc., be sold as required by law. At the time said default and judgment were entered the delinquent list filed by the collector did not contain the name of appellant, Chicago and Eastern Illinois Railway Company, nor any description of any real estate owned by it in said county. The certificate of publicationshowing the list of lands advertised as delinquent did not contain the name of appellant nor any description of any lands owned by it in said county. No one appeared in court on behalf of appellant on said September 28, but on the following day counsel for appellant filed objections in writing, to which were attached the notice of protest and the duplicate receipts of the collector showing, in itemized form, the taxes paid under protest, aggregating $998.63, and the amount paid without protest, $3867.45. The reason assigned by appellant's counsel for filing said objections was that in the evening of September 28, about four or five o'clock, the collector added to the foot of page 245, on line 29 of the tax judgment, sale, redemption and forfeiture record, the following: ‘C. & E. I. R. R. Paid under protest, in Sullivan Twp. Jonathan Creek Twp. Lowe Twp. $1997.19.’ The proof shows that said notation was so added after the default judgment was entered and no leave of court to amend the record appears. A motion to set aside default and for leave to be heard on objections filed on behalf of appellant was entered September 29. On October 4, a hearing on objections was set for October 6. On October 6, appellee filed a motion to strike the objections and the motion of appellant to vacate the default and judgment and for leave to be heard on the objections, and a hearing on the motion was set for October 12. On October 13, appellant filed additional grounds in support of the motion to vacate, among which were that the publication notice was insufficient, and that the court was without jurisdiction to enter the default against appellant or to enter said judgment. No convening order of the court for October 12 appears in the record, but a placita, showing...