Blake v. Taylor

Decision Date31 October 1892
Citation32 N.E. 401,142 Ill. 482
PartiesBLAKE v. TAYLOR et al.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from superior court of Cook county.

Bill by Margaret C. Blake against Frederick P. Taylor and Frederick W. Cleaver. Defendant Cleaver filed a cross bill. Both the original and cross bills were dismissed for want of equity, and complainant appeals. Affirmed.

Levi Sprague, (E. Hanecy, of counsel,) for appellant.

J. W. Merriam, (A. B. Jenks, of counsel,) for appellees.

WILKIN, J.

This action was begun in the court below by a bill in chancery by appellant against appellees, the object of which was to compel said Taylor to convey to her a certain lot in Cook county. Appellee Cleaver answered the bill, admitting complainant's cause of action; and also filed a cross bill, making said Taylor defendant, thereby seeking to compel him to convey the property as prayed in the original bill. While the original bill proceeds upon the theory that the complainant is entitled to a deed from Taylor by virtue of a contract of purchase with Cleaver, as Taylor's agent, the answer and cross bill of Cleaver denies any such agency, and avers that he sold said lot to the complainant in his own right, subject to a mortgage lien in Taylor. Taylor answered both the original and cross bills, denying all right of Cleaver to make said sale, either as his agent or as owner of the lot, or that said Cleaver had any right or title to the same, and setting up his title thereto in fee. The original bill by appellant, and the answer and cross bill of appellee Cleaver, all admit that Taylor, at the time of the alleged sale, held the title to the lot; but the cross bill and answer aver that his deed, though absolute in form, was intended only as a mortgage, the equity of redemption remaining in the said Cleaver. This is denied by Taylor, and the material issue in the case is thus raised. Prior to October 5, 1888, said Cleaver and one Frances A. Griswold purchased 200 feet of ground, of which said lot was a part, from W. E. Furnesse, the title being taken in the name of Griswold, and a trust deed or mortgage executed back to Furnesse for a part of the purchase money. It was afterwards agreed between Cleaver and Griswold that the former should take said lot, subject to $1,312.50 of the mortgage debt, held by Furnesse. Subsequently Cleaver became indebted to said Taylor in the sum of $800 for money advanced, to secure which Cleaver executed and delivered to Taylor a deed for a certain other lot. On said 5th day of October, 1888, said Griswold and wife, at the request of Cleaver, executed a quitclaim deed to Taylor...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Beebe v. Olentine
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 30 Enero 1911
  • Illman v. Kruse
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 22 Febrero 1922
  • Book v. Beasly
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 3 Abril 1897
    ... ... applicable under the facts herein; McArthur v ... Robinson, 62 N.W. 713; Wilson v. Parshall, 29 ... N.E. 297; Blake v. Taylor, 32 N.E. 401; Keithley ... v. Wood, 38 N.E. 149; Ahern v. McCarthy, 40 P ... 482; Dignan v. Moore, 36 P. 146. (2) The effect of ... the ... ...
  • Fanning v. Rogerson
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 2 Noviembre 1892
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT