Billings v. Sprague
| Decision Date | 31 January 1869 |
| Citation | 1869 WL 5154,49 Ill. 509 |
| Parties | HORACE BILLINGSv.CHARLES SPRAGUE. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Cass county; the Hon. JAMES HARRIOT, Judge, presiding.
This was an action of debt upon an injunction bond, instituted in the court below, by the appellees, Charles E. Parker and Charles Sprague, for the use of Charles Sprague, against the appellant, Horace Billings, impleaded with Frederick Potter. The further facts in this case are fully stated in the opinion.
Mr. H. E. DUMMER and Mr. L. LACEY, for the appellant.
Mr. G. POLLARD, for the appellee.
On the 27th of February, 1866, Potter filed a bill in chancery to enjoin the sale of certain real estate conveyed by him to one Parker, in trust to secure the payment of a note for $510, given by Potter to Sprague. The bond was conditioned that Potter, and Billings, the surety, should pay to Sprague all moneys and costs due or to be due to him, and all damages which might be awarded. The injunction was subsequently dissolved, and this is a suit upon the bond. The circuit court gave judgment for the amount of the note, and attorneys' fees in the injunction case. It is conceded that the fees were recoverable, but denied that the court had the right to include the amount of the note.
In injunction cases of this character, the statute prescribes no rule in regard to the conditions to be inserted in the bond. This is left to the discretion of the judge or master granting the writ, and where the object of the bill is to enjoin the collection of a promissory note, as in the present case, it is not an unreasonable exercise of such discretion to require the complainant to give security for the payment of the debt, in case he fails to maintain his suit. This was done in the present case. Such was the evident object of the bond. It will bear no other construction. It was voluntarily executed by the appellant as surety, and he must respond to its conditions. The judgment of the circuit court was in accordance with the obligation. The appellant, however, will be substituted in equity to the lien under the deed of trust, when he shall have paid the debt.
It is urged that the third instruction for the plaintiff was wrong, inasmuch as it directed the jury what amount to find. It was clearly error, and would be ground for reversing the judgment, if it were not apparent, from the record, that the jury...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bayard v. Mcgraw
...right to be subrogated to the rights of those creditors whose claims he had paid: Jacques et al. v. Falkney et al. 64 Ill. 87; Billings v. Sprague, 49 Ill. 509; City Nat. Bank v. Dudgeon, 65 Ill. 12. The mode of charging the premises, adopted in the case, is fatal to the decree: Croskey et ......
- Howard v. Burns
-
Silverman v. the Nw. Mut. Life Ins. Co.
...entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the company to the extent of $5.500 in the mortgage: Jacques v. Fackney, 64 Ill. 87; Billings v. Sprague, 49 Ill. 509. A court may retain a cross-bill for the purpose of settling the questions under it, after dismissal of the original bill: C. A. W......
-
Powell v. Allen
...v. Salter, 6 Bush, 624; Leake v. Ferguson, 2 Gratt. 419; Rogers v. McLurn's Adm. 4 Gratt. 81; Taul v. Epperson, 38 Tex. 492; Billings v. Sprague, 49 Ill. 509; Fogarty v. Beam, 100 Ill. 366. Although appellees were stockholders, they had a right to deal with the society or its creditors as i......