Hockett v. Bailey

• Decision Date: 30 September 1877
• Parties: JULIA E. HOCKETT et al.v.JOSIAH BAILEY.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

86 Ill. 74

1877 WL 9665 (Ill.)

JULIA E. HOCKETT et al.

v.JOSIAH BAILEY.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

September Term, 1877.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Iroquois County; the Hon. N. J. PILLSBURY, Judge, presiding.

This was a bill of interpleader filed by Youngman against Josiah Bailey, Julia E. Hockett, and Pleasant Hockett, her husband, setting forth that he had bought a piece of land without knowing that her husband had any claim or interest in the same, and owed $700 on the same. He paid the balance of the purchase money into court in order that it might be determined who was entitled to the same. Bailey claimed that Pleasant Hockett was the real owner of the land and money, and claimed it as a creditor of said Pleasant Hockett, while Mr. and Mrs. Hockett, in their answers, claimed that Pleasant Hockett had no interest in the money or land sold to Youngman, and Bailey had no claim on the land sold or the money due therefor.

It further appeared that Pleasant Hockett was indebted to Bailey on a note given March 28, 1870, for $542.58, due November 1, 1870, with ten per cent interest; that on February 24, 1873, Bailey sued out an attachment and caused the same to be levied on the land, but, learning that Youngman claimed to have purchased the land, the latter was garnisheed. On the hearing the court required Mr. and Mrs. Hockett to bring into court their deed to Youngman for the land, and enjoined Bailey from suing out execution against the land, and decreeing payment of Bailey's debt out of the money brought into court. Bailey also filed a cross-bill in the case.

Messrs. DOYLE & KING, for the appellants.

Messrs. BLADES, KAY & EVANS, for the appellee. Mr. JUSTICE CRAIG delivered the opinion of the Court:

It is true, the tract of land conveyed to Youngman, for which the money involved in this litigation is due and owing, was, at the time of the conveyance to Youngman, in the name of appellant Julia E. Hockett, but she, as appears, acquired the title from Antrim, October 4, 1871, who sold the land to Pleasant Hockett, and the consideration for the conveyance to her was a deed of a certain tract of land owned by Pleasant Hockett, which he conveyed to Antrim. If Pleasant Hockett, the husband, at the time he procured this land to be conveyed to his wife, had been free from debt, or if he had retained in his own name sufficient property to liquidate all his indebtedness, the transaction might have been sustained as a settlement upon the wife, and in such case she might have held the land in the same manner as if she had acquired it by descent, or purchase with her own separate property; but, it appears, when the husband had the land conveyed to her, he...