City of Chicago v. Hamlin
| Decision Date | 23 January 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 36655,36655 |
| Citation | 24 Ill.2d 148,180 N.E.2d 473 |
| Parties | CITY OF CHICAGO in Trust for the Use of Schools, Appellee, v. Gauther L. HAMLIN et al. (American National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago, as Trustee, Appellant). |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Hoffman & Davis, and Crowley, Sprecher, Barrett & Karaba, Chicago, for appellant.
Frank R. Schneberger and Frank S. Righeimer, Chicago (Richard E. Girard, Chicago, of counsel), for appellee.
On July 14, 1960, the city of Chicago, in trust for the use of schools, filed its emintent domain petition to acquire twenty parcels of land to be used by the Board of Education of the city for school purposes. The parcel here involved was owned by the defendant, American National Bank and Trust Company, as trustee. On August 26, 1960, the building on the defendant's property was substantially damaged by fire, and on October 31, 1960, on the condemnor's motion, the defendant's parcel was dismissed from the action without prejudice. Thereafter, on November 29, 1960, the defendant filed a motion to vacate the order of dismissal, alleging that the condemnor intended to file a new petition so that the value of the defendant's land at $6,775. as of a date after, rather than before, the fire. This motion was granted, and the case was set for trial on January 31, 1961.
On January 24, 1961, the petitioner moved for the entry of an order fixing August 27, 1960, instead of July 14, 1960, as the date with respect to which the value of the defendant's property should be determined. This motion was denied and the case was reset for trial on February 15, 1961.
When the case was called on that date, the defendant requested a change of venue on the basis that the trial judge was prejudiced against it. This motion was denied and the case proceeded to trial before a jury which returned a verdict fixing the value of the defendant's land at $6,775. Judgment was entered on the verdict, and the defendant appeals.
The point which the defendant urges most strongly in seeking to reverse the judgment is that it was error to deny the requested change of venue. It is of course true that the statutory provisions with respect to change of venue are to be liberally construed. (People v. Scott, 326 Ill. 327, 157 N.E. 247.) But it is also true that a petition for a change of venue is to be offered at the earliest practical moment (Com'rs. of Drainage Dist. No. 1 v. Goembel, 383 Ill. 323, 50 N.E.2d 444), and that a petition comes too late when it is presented after the judge has ruled on 'a substantive issue in the cause.' (People v. Chambers, 9 Ill.2d 83, 136 N.E.2d 812, 816; People v. Wilfong, 17 Ill.2d 373, 162 N.E.2d 256.) In the present case no substantive determination was of greater significance than that which fixed the date with respect to which the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hartnett v. Stack, 2-92-0208
...late if it is presented after the trial judge has ruled on a substantive issue in the case. (City of Chicago in Trust for the Use of Schools v. Hamlin (1962), 24 Ill.2d 148, 150, 180 N.E.2d 473.) A petition for a change of venue "must be brought at the earliest practical moment in order to ......
-
Department of Public Works and Buildings For and in Behalf of People v. Sun Oil Co.
...in condemnation proceedings are inadmissible at trial. (City of Waukegan v. Stanczak, 6 Ill.2d 594, 129 N.E.2d 751; Chicago v. Hamlin (1962), 24 Ill.2d 148, 18 N.E.2d 473). It is most difficult to determine what effect such conduct and error had on the minds of the jurors. On ruling on the ......
-
People v. McDonald
...comes too late. (People v. Chambers, 9 Ill.2d 83, 136 N.E.2d 812; People v. Wilfong, 17 Ill.2d 373, 162 N.E.2d 256; City of Chicago v. Hamlin, 24 Ill.2d 148, 180 N.E.2d 473.) Here, as pointed out in the Chambers case, the trial court considered a substantive issue and a part of the merits o......
-
People ex rel. Village of Northbrook v. City of Highland Park
...case.' It has been repeatedly held that this statute is to be liberally construed. This principle was stated in City of Chicago v. Hamlin, 24 Ill.2d 148, 150, 180 N.E.2d 473, 475, immediately followed by this important 'But it is also true that a petition for a change of venue is to be offe......