Gould v. Sternburg

• Court: Supreme Court of Illinois
• Writing for the Court: WILKIN
• Citation: 128 Ill. 510,21 N.E. 628
• Parties: GOULD et al. v. STERNBURG.
• Decision Date: 16 May 1889

128 Ill. 510
21 N.E. 628

GOULD et al.
v.
STERNBURG.¹

Supreme Court of Illinois.

May 16, 1889.

Error to circuit court, Will county; CHARLES BLANCHARD, Judge.

Ejectment by Mary E. Sternburg against Hiram Gould, Charles Gould, and George Gould. Plaintiff obtained judgment. Defendants bring error.

[128 Ill. 512]Haley & O'Donnell, for plaintiffs in error.

R. E. Barber and B. M. Munn, for defendant in error.

[128 Ill. 513]WILKIN, J.

To maintain the issue on her part plaintiff below proved a common source of title in Hiram Gould. She then introduced in evidence, without objection, a sheriff's deed for the premises in question, dated September 23, 1871, reciting that at the January term, 1868, of the Will circuit court, as administratrix of her deceased husband, Philip A. Sternburg, she obtained a judgment against said Hiram Gould for $322.40, upon [128 Ill. 514]which by execution and sale said deed was executed and delivered to her, also a bill in chancery in the same court by her as complainant, against Hiram Gould, Elizabeth Gould, Delancy Jackson, and James Gould, in which, among other things, it is alleged that on the 11th day of November, 1856, one Richardson and Hiram Gould made and delivered to Philip A. Sternburg, since deceased, a promissory note for $200, due in three years, with interest; that said Philip, prior to his death, had brought suit upon said note, and that afterwards, January, 1868, she as his administratrix recovered the judgment, and obtained the deed above mentioned; that at the time of making said

[21 N.E. 629]

note said Hiram Gould owned the land described in said sheriff's deed in fee unincumbered, and continued to own the same up to and at the time of said sale, but in November, 1859, for the purpose of preventing the collection of said note, and without any consideration, he, with his wife, Elizabeth, conveyed the same to said Jackson, and that afterwards said Jackson and wife, without consideration, reconveyed the same to said Hiram Gould, but that said Hiram secretly held said deed for several years, and on May 1, 1880, placed it on record with the name Hiram errased, and the name James inserted, thereby making the conveyance to James Gould, instead of Hiram Gould, which change is alleged to have been a forgery, made for the purpose of cheating and defrauding creditors of said Hiram. She also introduced in evidence the answer of Hiram Gould, in which he avers that the conveyance made by him to Delancy Jackson was in good faith for a valuable consideration, and that said Jackson took possession under the same, and afterwards conveyed to James Gould. The answer denies generally all the allegations of said bill. The answer of James Gould was also introduced, which is a general denial of the bill. The prayer of the bill was that said conveyances should be set aside as against the complainant therein, and that she be put in possession of said premises. [128 Ill. 515]The decree,...