Hunter v. Dennis

• Decision Date: 17 November 1884
• Citation: 1884 WL 10027,112 Ill. 568
• Parties: WILSON J. HUNTER et al.v.ELIZABETH A. DENNIS et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

112 Ill. 568

1884 WL 10027 (Ill.)

WILSON J. HUNTER et al.

v.ELIZABETH A. DENNIS et al.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Filed at Ottawa Nov. 17, 1884.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Kendall county; the Hon. ISAAC G. WILSON, Judge, presiding.

Mr. R. N. BOTSFORD, for the appellants:

The dismissal of the original bill was clearly erroneous, as there was no dispute as to the material allegations of the bill. The record shows a clear case of trust, and the cause should have been referred to the master to state the account. Sallee v. Morgan, 67 Ill. 376; Moss v. McCall, 75 Id. 191; Daly v. Catholic Church, 97 Id. 17; Koon v. Hollingsworth, Id. 52.

The possession of Mrs. Dennis was not adverse, under the circumstances of this case.

Mr. FRANK CROSBY, and Mr. EDWARD C. LOVELL, for the appellees:

Equity follows the law in the analogy of the application of the Statute of Limitations. Kane County v. Herrington, 50 Ill. 329.

Amanda Hunter being an infant at the time of her father's death, the Statute of Limitations, so far as this disability is concerned, became a bar at the expiration of twenty years from her attaining her majority, to-wit, in 1875,-- seven years before the filing of the original bill. Stevenson v. Westfall, 18 Ill. 209.

The fact that Amanda Hunter was married in 1854, being still an infant, would not prevent the bar of the statute. It is a familiar principle, that when the statute has once begun to run, successive or cumulative disabilities do not remove the bar. There can be no “tacking” of disabilities. Angell and Ames on Limitations, (3d ed.) 490, 491; Keil v. Healey, 84 Ill. 104.

The appellee, Elizabeth A. Dennis, at the death of her husband, was entitled to the possession of the premises until assignment of dower to her, as was the case in Strawn v. Strawn's Heirs, 50 Ill. 258.

Mr. JUSTICE SHELDON delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was a bill in chancery, filed in the Kane county circuit court, on April 17, 1882, by the legal heirs of George Dennis, deceased, to have a certain deed from George Dennis to one Black declared a mortgage, and for an accounting, and a partition of the premises described in the deed. Elizabeth A. Dennis, the widow of James Dennis, and others, were made defendants, the bill setting out that after the death of James Dennis, the widow, Elizabeth A., paid the mortgage debt to Black, and he made to her a deed of the premises; that upon that deed, in an action of ejectment, she had recovered a judgment for the possession of the premises,--and the bill asked for an injunction to restrain proceedings under that judgment. Elizabeth A. Dennis answered, admitting, substantially, the allegations of the bill, and setting up the Statute of Limitations. She also filed her cross-bill, setting up her widow's award, divers matters of account, and asking that an account be taken, and the amount found due her be declared a lien on the premises. Upon final hearing, the circuit court dismissed both the original and cross-bills, for want of equity. The complainants in the original bill appeal.

The undisputed facts are, that George Dennis, at the time of his death, was the equitable owner of the premises in question; that he had made a loan of money from Black, and secured the loan by an absolute conveyance of the premises to Black; that after the death of Dennis, his widow, Elizabeth A. Dennis, paid the loan to Black with means of her own, and received from him a reconveyance of the premises, by...