Glos v. Bain

• Decision Date: 23 October 1906
• Citation: Glos v. Bain, 223 Ill. 343, 79 N.E. 111 (Ill. 1906)
• Parties: GLOS et al. v. BAIN.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

223 Ill. 343

79 N.E. 111

GLOS et al.

v.BAIN.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Oct. 23, 1906.

Appeal from Superior Court, Cook County; Joseph E. Gary, Judge.

Action by Susan M. Bain against Jacob Glos and another. From a decree in favor of plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Jacob Glos, pro se (John R. O'Connor, of counsel).

William Gibson, for appellee.

CARTWRIGHT, J.

This cause was heard in the superior court of Cook county upon the amended bill of appellee, filed to set aside a tax deed issued to Jacob Glos, one of the appellants, and to restrain appellants from asserting any title under or by virtue of said deed; the answers of appellants denying the material allegations of the bill, the replications of the appellee thereto, and evidence touching the issues thus formed heard by the chancellor, who found all the material allegations of the bill to be true, and granted the relief prayed for. The lot the title to which was in dispute was numbered 19 in block 1 of B. F. Jacobs' subdivision of a certain tract of land in Cook county, and appellants take the position that appellee did not prove title to the lot. The original bill was filed on April 10, 1905, and there was evidence that appellee took possession of the lot on April 5, 1905, under an unrecorded quitclaim deed, and inclosed it with a wire fence, and was in possession when the bill was filed. Appellants contend that the evidence was not sufficient to identify the lot as the one around which the fence was built, on account of uncertainty in the measurements taken from the center of the street and the curb line to determine its location. The most that can be said on that subject is that some slight inaccuracy was possible in the method adopted, but there was no evidence tending to show any such inaccuracy, or that any mistake occurred. There was nothing to discredit the testimony as to the location of the lot, and we cannot assume that the measurements were incorrect.

Appellee's paper title consisted of a conveyance from B. F. Jacobs and wife, dated September 19, 1898, and recorded October 10, 1898, conveying the lot to Harry E. Moore, and a quitclaim deed from Harry E. Moore and A. H. Moore, dated January 24, 1905, but not recorded, conveying the lot to appellee. The principal argument for appellants is that the tax deed issued to Jacob Glos, which was recorded on July 15, 1901, vested in him a title superior to that to appellee by virtue of the statute providing for the...