People v. Shaw
| Decision Date | 30 June 1852 |
| Citation | 3 Peck 581,13 Ill. 581,1852 WL 4327 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE, on the relation of George Dixon,v.BELA SHAW et al. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
13 Ill. 581
1852 WL 4327 (Ill.)
3 Peck (IL) 581
THE PEOPLE, on the relation of George Dixon,
v.
BELA SHAW et al.
Supreme Court of Illinois.
June Term, 1852.
[13 Ill. 582]
THIS was a proceeding by information, in the nature of a quo warranto, originally commenced in the Winnebago circuit court, and removed to the county of Stephenson by change of venue.Notice in the name of the state's attorney for the eleventh judicial circuit was served upon the defendants, Bela Shaw and others, of a motion to be made in the Winnebago circuit court, for a rule upon them to show cause why leave should not be given to the state's attorney to exhibit in that court an information in the nature of a quo warranto, upon the relation of George Dixon against the defendants, for usurping, intruding into, and unlawfully holding and executing the office of bridge commissioners of the Rockford bridge, and that an affidavit would be exhibited in support of the motion.
Application for the writ was made and resisted. At the March term, 1850, of the Winnebago circuit court, the relator filed his petition and affidavit for a change of venue, alleging that the judge of that court was prejudiced against the relator. After hearing argument, the judge of the Winnebago circuit court ordered the venue changed to Stephenson county. The transcript and papers, except the petition for the change of venue, were filed in the Stephenson circuit court, at March term, 1850. Application was then made to the Stephenson circuit court, for leave to file the information; the defendants resisted the application, but the court granted leave to file the information. The writ of subpœna was issued and returned served. The information was filed at the same term.
At September term, 1851, the defendants entered their appearance, and filed a plea that the Stephenson circuit court ought not to take cognizance of or sustain the proceeding by quo warranto, because the cause of action accrued in the county of Winnebago and within the jurisdiction of the circuit court of that county, and not within the jurisdiction of the Stephenson county circuit court.
To this plea the relator filed a general demurrer. After a hearing
[13 Ill. 583]
upon the demurrer, it was overruled, and the court declined to proceed farther for want of jurisdiction. Judgment was given against the relator for costs.The counsel for the relator then moved the court to remand the cause to Winnebago county, which motion was overruled. The counsel for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Scott
... ... Special statutory proceedings have been held by this court to be civil suits within the meaning of the Venue Act. Quo warranto was held to be a civil proceeding within the meaning of that act, in People v. Shaw, 13 Ill. 581, and Ensminger v. People, 47 Ill. 384, 95 Am. Dec. 495. A proceeding to collect taxes is a civil suit within the meaning of the Venue Act. People v. St. Louis Merchants' Bridge Co., 282 Ill. 408, 118 N. E. 733. A proceeding for the confirmation of a special assessment is a suit within ... ...
-
People ex rel. Wilcox v. Drainage Com'rs of Union Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Pana & Assumption
... ... People v. Shaw, 13 Ill. 581;Ensminger v. People, 47 Ill. 384, 95 Am. Dec. 495;People v. Boyd, 132 Ill. 60, 23 N. E. 342;People v. Gartenstein, 248 Ill. 546, 94 N. E. 128. The jury are not judges of the law in such a case, and the court may determine, as a question of law, whether there is sufficient evidence of ... ...
-
People ex rel. Lord v. Bruennemer
... ... The action of quo warranto is a purely civil one (People v. Shaw, 13 Ill. 581;Ensminger v. People, 47 Ill. 384;People v. Boyd, 132 Ill. 60, 23 N. E. 342; High, Extr. Rem. 603); and it is so declared by the statute, which also gives the right of appeal in express terms (Rev. St. 1893, c. 112, 7). This answers the argument on the first ground of the motion.When ... ...
-
People ex rel. Fitzgerald v. Boyd
... ... People v. Shaw, 13 Ill. 581;Ensminger v. People, 47 Ill. 384. The quo warranto proceeding is used to enforce both public and private rights. Its purpose is dual; and the law, as regards the statute of limitations, ought to, and we think does, apply to the action, at least where its object is to enforce private ... ...