People v. Banks
| Decision Date | 21 October 1918 |
| Docket Number | No. 11852.,11852. |
| Citation | 285 Ill. 137,120 N.E. 466 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. BANKS et al. (WELCH, Intervener). |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Circuit Court, Adams County; Harry Higbee, Judge.
Action by the People of the State of Illinois against Leonard Banks and others, in which John F. Welch filed an intervening petition, making F. B. McKennan, Joseph L. Thomas, County Collector of Adams County, and Della M. Armstrong, parties defendant. Defendant F. B. McKennan filed an answer to the intervening petition, and defendants Joseph L. Thomas, County Collector of Adams County, and Della M. Armstrong, demurred thereto. Demurrer sustained, and from the decree dismissing the petition the intervening petitioner brings error. Writ dismissed.
Charles M. Peirce and W. W. Whitmore, both of Bloomington, for plaintiff in error.
F. B. McKennan and S. A. Hubbard, both of Quincy, for defendants in error.
John F. Welch, at the June term, 1914, of the Adams county circuit court, filed an intervening petition in a certain foreclosure suit by the People against Leonard Banks, which foreclosure suit is referred to in this record as No. 2418. The foreclosure suit was for the purpose of foreclosing certain tax liens against the lands of Banks in the interest of certain parties, including Welch, who were holders of bonds issued by the Lima Lake drainage district; Banks having failed to pay the assessments levied against his lands in the district to pay said bonds. Welch made as parties defendant to his intervening petition the county collector of Adams county and F. B. McKennan, and subsequent to the filing of the intervening petition Della M. Armstrong was permitted to become a party defendant. All of the defendants to the intervening petition filed demurrers thereto and the court sustained the demurrers. On appeal to this court the decree of the circuit court was affirmed; the holding of this court being, in substance, that the petition did not state facts sufficient to entitle the petitioner to any relief. The opinion of the court in that case is found in People v. Banks, 272 Ill. 502, 112 N. E. 269, to which reference is hereby made for a more complete statement of the facts in that case and for a more complete understanding of the case now before us.
After the affirmance in that case of the decree of the court as above related, Welch filed a new intervening petition on the foreclosure suit, in which he sought to remedy the defects of the former petition by further and other averments, making McKennan, Joseph L. Thomas, county collector of said county, and Della M. Armstrong, parties defendant thereto, and praying as relief that the court order and direct the county collector to execute and deliver to him a proper deed of conveyance to the land mentioned in the foreclosure suit and for such other and further relief as equity may require, etc. The county collector and treasurer of the county and Della M. Armstrong filed separate general and special demurrers to the petition, which demurrers were sustained by the court. McKennan filed an answer to the petition, denying all the specific allegations made against him, and denying that the petitioner was entitled to a deed to the premises or to any relief whatever. He also denied that Della M. Armstrong held the title to said land in trust for him. A replication to the answer was filed, and thereafter, on April 24, 1917, on motion of Della M. Armstrong, the intervening petition was dismissed at petitioner's cost for want of equity, the petitioner having elected to stand by his petition. Welch sued out this writ of error to reverse the decree of the court.
There was no trial of the issues made on the answer of McKennan to the petition, and the record shows that those issues are still pending for trial and decision in the circuit court.
The principal facts alleged in this petition by which the plaintiff in error claims equitable relief against F. B. McKennan and Della M. Armstrong are that McKennan represented plaintiff in error as attorney in foreclosure suit No. 2418 under...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bride v. Stormer
...to the remaining defendants, except where great hardship or injustice would be occasioned by a denial of such an appeal. People v. Banks, 285 Ill. 137, 140, 120 N.E. 466;Sheaff v. Spindler, 339 Ill. 540, 549, 171 N.E. 632;Free v. Successful Merchant, 342 Ill. 27, 30, 173 N.E. 753. The decre......
-
Sheaff v. Spindler
...in the opinion. In addition to them may be cited the cases of Bucklen v. City of Chicago, 166 Ill. 451, 46 N. E. 1073, and People v. Banks, 285 Ill. 137, 120 N. E. 466. This principle of the interlocutory character of the order of dismissal as to Duplissis also answers the first proposition......
-
Selz v. Stafford
... ... Landers, 70 Cal. 79, 11 Pac. 505;Hoyt v. Dengler, 54 Kan. 309, 38 Pac. 260;Dennison v. Grove, 52 N. J. Law, 144, 19 Atl. 186;Hanley v. Banks, 6 Okl. 79, 5 Pac. 664; 18 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law (2d Ed.) 322; 3 Sutherland on Damages (4th Ed.) 3258, 876; Rubens v. Hill, supra. It further ... ...
-
People v. Banks
...the writ, on the ground that the decree entered was not final as to all the parties, which decision will be found in People v. Banks, 285 Ill. 137, 120 N. E. 466. Afterwards McKennan withdrew his answer in the lower court, and also filed a general and special demurrer to Welch's amended pet......