Brown v. Van Keuren, 20063.

Citation172 N.E. 1,340 Ill. 118
Decision Date20 June 1930
Docket NumberNo. 20063.,20063.
PartiesBROWN v. VAN KEUREN et al.
CourtSupreme Court of Illinois

340 Ill. 118
172 N.E. 1


No. 20063.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June 20, 1930.

Certiorari proceeding by Samuel Brown against J. H. Van Keuren, an acting Judge of Cook County, and others, to review certain proceedings against petitioner and others for the support of grandchildren under the Paupers Act. Upon hearing, a judgment order was entered dismissing the petition and quashing the writ, and petitioner appeals.

Reversed and remanded, with directions.

[340 Ill. 120]

[172 N.E. 2]

Appeal from Circuit Court, Cook County; Thomas Taylor, Jr., judge.
Gallagher, Shulman & Abrams, of Chicago, for appellant.

Ernest Kentwortz, of Chicago, for appellees.


Appellant, Samuel Brown, filed his petition in the circuit court of Cook county directed against appellees, J. H. E. Van Keuren, an acting judge of Cook county, Robert M. Sweitzer, clerk of the county court of Cook county, and others, for a writ of certiorari to review certain proceedings had in the county court of Cook county upon the petition of Robert E. Crowe, then state's attorney of Cook county, against appellant and others, for the support of certain grandchildren under the Paupers Act. The petition alleges that a hearing was had on the complaint in the county court without service upon appellant; that a judgment was entered against him ordering him to make weekly payments for the support of the grandchildren; that he prayed an appeal, which was allowed; that he was thereafter advised that no appeal would lie from the judgment, nor could the matter be taken up by writ of error; that his only remedy was by petition for writ of certiorari, and that the Paupers Act of March 23, 1874 (Smith-Hurd Rev. St. 1929, c. 107, §§ 1-36) was unconstitutional. Leave was given to file the petition, the writ of certiorari issued, return duly made, a hearing had in the circuit court, a judgment order entered therein finding that the appellant was not able to sustain the material allegations of the petition, dismissing the petition, and quashing the writ of certiorari theretofore issued. An appeal has been prayed to this court on the ground that the constitutionality of a statute is involved.

This is a purely statutory proceeding, jurisdiction of which is conferred upon the county court by the Paupers [340 Ill. 121]Act-an act which is complete in itself, and which does not provide for an appeal or other mode for reviewing the proceedings. The law is well settled in this state that the circuit courts may award the common-law writ of certiorari to all inferior tribunals and jurisdictions within the state where it appears that they have exceeded the limits of their jurisdiction or where they have proceeded illegally and no appeal is allowed or other mode provided by law for reviewing their proceedings. People v. Wilkinson, 13 Ill. 660. In Kinsloe v. Pogue, 213 Ill. 302, 72 N. E. 906, it was held that the circuit court may award the common-law writ of certiorari to the county court to review its proceedings in statutory proceedings where its decision is final and where the Legislature has failed to provide for a review of its decision.

The only office which the common-law writ of certiorari performs is to bring before the court the record of the proceedings of an inferior tribunal for an inspection by a superior...

To continue reading

Request your trial
34 cases
  • M.M., In re, s. 73377
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 26 Agosto 1993 the rules of limited jurisdiction (DeKing, 155 Ill.App.3d at 596, 108 Ill.Dec. 216, 508 N.E.2d 377, citing Brown v. VanKeuren (1930), 340 Ill. 118, 122, 172 N.E. 1) and courts exercising jurisdiction over such matters must proceed within the strictures of the statute (see Fredman Brother......
  • In re M.W., 104519.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 23 Enero 2009
    ...Ill.2d at 84, 67 Ill.Dec. 813, 445 N.E.2d 293 (Goldenhersh, J., specially concurring, joined by Underwood, J.), citing Brown v. VanKeuren, 340 Ill. 118, 172 N.E. 1 (1930)), the new constitution expanded the circuit court's jurisdiction to all justiciable matters, making no distinction betwe......
  • Marriage of Verdung, In re, 66294
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 2 Febrero 1989
    ......Estep (1955), 6 Ill.2d 127, 128, 126 N.E.2d 637; Brown v. VanKeuren (1930), 340 Ill. 118, 121-22, 172 N.E. 1; Rock Island Bank & Trust Co. v. Stauduhar ......
  • Contest of Election for Offices of Governor and Lieutenant Governor Held at General Election on November 2, 1982, In re
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • 2 Noviembre 1982
    ...... (Young v. Mikva (1977), 66 Ill.2d 579, 582, 6 Ill.Dec. 904, 363 N.E.2d 851.) In Brown v. Van Keuren (1930), 340 Ill. 118, 172 N.E. 1, this court was asked to decide an action under the ......
  • 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