Oliver v. Oliver

Decision Date17 February 1899
Citation178 Ill. 527,53 N.E. 303
PartiesOLIVER v. OLIVER et al.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from circuit court, McLean county; Colostin D. Myers, Judge.

Scire facias, by Revilo Oliver against Edward R. Oliver and others to revive a judgment. From a ruling of the court quashing the writ, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Tipton & Tipton and H. P. Beach, for appellant.

Ezra M. Prince and Charles L. Capen, for appellees.

Henry H. McDowell, pro se.

The following statement of this case is made by the appellant in this court: ‘This is a proceeding by scire facias by Revilo Oliver, appellant, against Edward R. Oliver and other heirs of Franklin Oliver, deceased, and the tenants in possession of the lands in question, and J. E. Brown, trustee, who holds the lands in trust for the heirs of Franklin Oliver, deceased, appellees. On the 14th day of February, 1881, Revilo Oliver obtained a judgment in an action of assumpsit in the circuit court of McLean county against his father, Franklin Oliver, for the sum of $7,789 and costs of suit. An execution was duly issued upon the judgment, and returned ‘No property found.’ After the return of the execution, Franklin Oliver died, his death occurring on the 19th day of September, 1881, leaving, him surviving, his heirs, as set forth in the writ of sci. fa.; and the other defendants are tenants of the land, except J. E. Brown, who, as trustee, holds the title to the lands in question, without power of sale, for the use of the heirs of Franklin Oliver. At the time of Franklin Oliver's death, he owned no real estate, except as will be stated, and left no personal property whatever. After his death, letters of administration were granted on his estate to Franklin C. Oliver and Patrick H. Oliver, who did nothing with the estate, except to file an appraisement bill and a paper purporting to be an inventory, and give notice for the probating of claims. They received no assets, personal or real, and both of the administrators died in 1894. In 1892 Florence Ross and other of the heirs of Franklin Oliver filed their bill in chancery in the Livingston circuit court against L. E. Payson and others, and such proceedings were had in that case that a decree was entered dismissing the bill, and the case was brought by writ of error to this court, and an opinion filed October 20, 1896, reported as Ross v. Payson, 160 Ill. 349, 43 N. E. 399, where a full statement of the facts with regard to these lands will be found. After said cause was remanded, a decree was entered devesting L. E. Payson of the title to the lands in question; and by some arrangement the title was vested in George Torrance, trustee for the heirs of Franklin Oliver, deceased. On his subsequent resignation of the trust, J. E. Brown was appointed his successor in trust. * * * The whole question arises on the ruling of the court in quashing the writ of sci. fa., and the whole question involved is presented by the writ and ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Warren v. Nix
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • January 16, 1911
    ...and the sureties on their official bonds, the bank and the stockholders of the bank." 15 Am. & Eng. Enc. Pl. & Pr. 481-2; 1 Cyc. 644; 53 N.E. 303; 39 Am. Dec. 628; 17 Id. 569; 12 Id. 684; 27 S.E. 352; 38 S.E. 510; Kirby's Dig. § 990. Powell & Taylor and C. W. McKay, for appellant J. O. Hutc......
  • Hume v. Town of Blackberry, 84-0047
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • February 21, 1985
    ...in his personal capacity and on the other in his official character. McElhanon v. McElhanon (1872), 63 Ill. 457; Oliver v. Oliver (1899), 178 Ill. 527, 529, 53 N.E. 303; compare 59 Am.Jr.2d Parties sec. 6 We conclude plaintiff Hume was properly dismissed as a party and note defendants do no......
  • Oliver v. Oliver
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • February 17, 1899
    ...McLean circuit court, where the said judgment was rendered, to revive the judgment, and that they were still pending. See Oliver v. Oliver, 178 Ill. 527 53 N. E. 303, for the proceedings in, and decision of, that case. Appellant also filed his intervening petition, in which he set up said j......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT