People ex rel. Wilcox v. Drainage Com'rs of Union Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Pana & Assumption, 11548.
| Court | Supreme Court of Illinois |
| Writing for the Court | CARTWRIGHT |
| Citation | 282 Ill. 514,118 N.E. 742 |
| Parties | PEOPLE ex rel. WILCOX et al. v. DRAINAGE COM'RS OF UNION DIST. NO. 1 OF TOWNS OF PANA AND ASSUMPTION. |
| Docket Number | No. 11548.,11548. |
| Decision Date | 20 February 1918 |
282 Ill. 514
118 N.E. 742
PEOPLE ex rel. WILCOX et al.
v.
DRAINAGE COM'RS OF UNION DIST. NO. 1 OF TOWNS OF PANA AND ASSUMPTION.
No. 11548.
Supreme Court of Illinois.
Feb. 20, 1918.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Christian County; J. C. McBride, Judge.
Quo warranto proceedings by the People, on the relation of W. O. Wilcox and others, against the Drainage Commissioners of Union District No. 1 of the Towns of Pana and Assumption. From a judgment of ouster, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
[282 Ill. 515]Taylor & Taylor and W. B. McBride, all of Taylorville, for appellants.
John E. Hogan, of Taylorville, and Brown & Burnside, of Vandalia, for appellees.
CARTWRIGHT, J.
This is the same proceeding by information in the nature of quo warranto which was before this court on a former appeal from the circuit court of Christian county wherein the judgment of the circuit court was reversed for error of the court in refusing to direct a verdict of guilty. People v. Barber, 265 Ill. 316, 106 N. E. 798. Upon the cause being reinstated in the circuit court the information was amended by leave of court, and to the amended information the defendants filed three pleas: The first a disclaimer of any right to exercise jurisdiction over certain lands described in the plea; the second a plea of res judicata by the original judgment of the circuit court as to the owners of lands who did not join in the appeal to this court; the third a plea of justification as to the lands not included in the first and second pleas, alleging that the owners had made the connection with the ditches of the district required by the statute and thereby made voluntary application to have their lands annexed. As to the first plea of disclaimer the relators moved for a judgment of ouster, but no judgment was entered. To the second plea the relators filed a demurrer, which was overruled, and they then filed a replication setting[282 Ill. 516]forth the decision of this court on the appeal, and to that replication the defendants demurred. The demurrer was overruled and the defendants elected to stand by the demurrer, whereupon the relators asked for judgment on the lands described in that plea, but none was entered. As to the third plea of justification for the annexation of the lands not described in the first and second pleas, the relators replied traversing the allegations of the plea, and also filed a replication that a portion of the lands of the relators, prior to the attempted annexation, had been organized into another drainage district. Issues were joined and submitted to a jury, and at the conclusion of the evidence the court directed a verdict of guilty, and judgment of ouster was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. United Med. Serv., Inc., No. 23169.
...to show by what warrant a franchise or privilege is exercised. People v. Barber, 289 Ill. 556, 124 N.E. 594;People v. Drainage Com'rs, 282 Ill. 514, 118 N.E. 742;Independent Medical College v. People, 182 Ill. 274, 55 N.E. 345. The precise question presented here, whether a corporation may ......
-
People ex rel. Leighty v. Young, No. 15230.
...Theological Seminary v. People, 189 Ill. 439, 59 N. E. 977;City of Chicago v. Lord, 279 Ill. 167, 116 N. E. 630;People v. Drainage Com'rs, 282 Ill. 514, 118 N. E. 742; 2 R. C. L. 223. The lucid, explicit, and intelligible [309 Ill. 31]exposition of the mandate of the Constitution, and the d......
-
O'Donnell v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., No. 77-1557
...the judge to compel entry of a proper final order. People v. Drainage Com'rs of Union Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Pana and Assumption (1918), 282 Ill. 514, 118 N.E. We reach the merits with respect to issues concerning approval of the settlement. The settlement contained an express provision re......
-
Valbert v. Valbert, No. 11851.
...failing, gradually, all the time, but we find no witness who testified definitely that he was capable of executing the will in November, [118 N.E. 742]1913, and was not capable of executing the codicil and the deeds in February, 1914, and we do not see how it can be argued, from this record......
-
People v. United Med. Serv., Inc., No. 23169.
...to show by what warrant a franchise or privilege is exercised. People v. Barber, 289 Ill. 556, 124 N.E. 594;People v. Drainage Com'rs, 282 Ill. 514, 118 N.E. 742;Independent Medical College v. People, 182 Ill. 274, 55 N.E. 345. The precise question presented here, whether a corporation may ......
-
People ex rel. Leighty v. Young, No. 15230.
...Theological Seminary v. People, 189 Ill. 439, 59 N. E. 977;City of Chicago v. Lord, 279 Ill. 167, 116 N. E. 630;People v. Drainage Com'rs, 282 Ill. 514, 118 N. E. 742; 2 R. C. L. 223. The lucid, explicit, and intelligible [309 Ill. 31]exposition of the mandate of the Constitution, and the d......
-
O'Donnell v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., No. 77-1557
...the judge to compel entry of a proper final order. People v. Drainage Com'rs of Union Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Pana and Assumption (1918), 282 Ill. 514, 118 N.E. We reach the merits with respect to issues concerning approval of the settlement. The settlement contained an express provision re......
-
Valbert v. Valbert, No. 11851.
...failing, gradually, all the time, but we find no witness who testified definitely that he was capable of executing the will in November, [118 N.E. 742]1913, and was not capable of executing the codicil and the deeds in February, 1914, and we do not see how it can be argued, from this record......