Sharp v. Kennedy

Decision Date17 January 1957
Docket NumberGen. No. 10092
Citation139 N.E.2d 594,12 Ill.App.2d 353
PartiesCharles L. SHARP, also known as C. L. Sharp, Plaintiff, Katherine Huber, Executor under the Last Will and Testament of Charies L. Sharp, deceased, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Grace KENNEDY, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

Hutson & Hutson, Monticello, Nichols & Jones, Tuscola, for appellant.

Lemna & Lee, Tuscola, Giffin, Winning, Lindner & Newkirk, Springfield (James F. Lemna and Raymond Lee, Jr., Tuscola, Robert H. Brunsman, Springfield, of counsel), for appellee.

REYNOLDS, Presiding Justice.

On February 10, 1955, Charles L. Sharp, also called C. L. Sharp, obtained judgment by confession in the Circuit Court of Douglas County, Illinois, against Grace Kennedy. Execution on said judgment was issued and the sheriff returned the execution as not satisfied.

On February 28, 1955, Grace Kennedy, the defendant, filed her motion to vacate and set aside the judgment of February 10, 1955, and for leave to plead to the complaint, or, in the alternative, to reduce the amount of the judgment. This motion was verified by Grace Kennedy who stated that she had read the motion, and that the facts contained therein were true. On October 28, 1955, defendant Grace Kennedy, made motion to file amended and supplemental motion to set aside the judgment and for leave to plead or, in the alternative, to reduce the amount of the judgment. This motion was allowed and on the same day the amended and supplemental motion of the defendant was filed. At the same time, suggestion of the death of Charles L. Sharp was made and on motion Katherine Huber, as executor of the estate of Charles L. Sharp, was substituted as party plaintiff. On the same day, October 28, 1955, the plaintiff filed a counter-affidavit, which attacked the defendant's motion on the ground that the motion was not supported by sufficient affidavit as required by Supreme Court Rules 15 and 26 (Smith-Hurd Revised Statutes 1953, Chapter 110, pars. 259.15 and 259.26), and that the defendant Grace Kennedy was not competent to testify to facts occurring before the death of Charles L. Sharp and was not therefore competent to make affidavit in support of defendant's motion. And on the same day, the defendant Grace Kennedy, obtained leave of court to file additional affidavit in support of her motions. This was done on November 2, 1955, by the filing of an affidavit by Patricia Kennedy Hutson, daughter of the defendant, which affidavit stated that the affiant had read the motion to vacate and set aside judgment and for leave to plead to said complaint, or, in the alternative, to reduce amount of said judgment; that she had read the amended and supplemental motion to vacate and set aside judgment and for leave to plead to said complaint, and that she had personal knowledge of the facts set forth in both motions, that said facts contained in said motions and each of them were true and that the affiant if sworn as a witness was competent to testify thereto. On November 10, 1955, the plaintiff filed her second counter-affidavit, and for grounds for dismissal of defendant's motion stated that the motion was not supported by sufficient affidavit as required by Supreme Court Rules 15 and 26, and that the affiant Patricia Kennedy Hutson under Section 2 of the Evidence Act (Smith-Hurd Revised Stat.1953, Chapter 51, par. 2) was not competent to testify to facts occurring before the death of Charles L. Sharp and was not competent therefore to make the affidavit in support of the defendant's motion. The second counter-affidavit of the plaintiff further contended that the affidavit does not set forth existing facts but is comprised of conclusions, and as a final ground the counter-affidavit set forth that the motion of the defendant as originally filed and the amended motion were inconsistent. To the second counter-affidavit of the plaintiff, the defendant moved to strike.

On December 16, 1955, the motion of defendant to strike plaintiff's counter-affidavit was denied. The court also denied the motion to set aside the judgment and for leave to plead. From the ruling of the court, the defendant appeals to this court.

From the pleadings it appears that the plaintiff Charles L. Sharp, and Martin B. Kennedy, husband of Grace Kennedy were partners. The partnership was dissolved by agreement dated January 31, 1949, and Martin B. Kennedy and the defendant Grace Kennedy, his wife, executed certain promissory notes as consideration for Sharp's partnership interest upon the dissolution of the partnership.

There were nine of the promissory notes. Notes Numbered 1 to 4, inclusive, were dated January 24, 1949, were payable to Charles L. Sharp, and were signed by Martin B. Kennedy and Grace T. Kennedy. Each of these notes were for $1,000 and bore interest at the rate of 4 1/2% per annum. Notes Numbered 5 to 8, inclusive, were dated January 1, 1952, were payable to Charles L. Sharp, and were signed by Martin B. Kennedy and Grace T. Kennedy. Each of these notes was for $1,000 and bore interest at the rate of 4 1/2% per annum. Note Numbered 9 was dated August 1, 1953, in the amount of $646.98, was payable to C. L. Sharp, and was signed by M. B. Kennedy and Grace Kennedy. This note bore no interest. On January 21, 1952, Charles L. Sharp and Martin B. Kennedy entered into an agreement which recited that on January 31, 1949, they had entered into a contract dissolving their partnership, and that Sharp had received certain promissory notes as consideration for his withdrawal from the firm. This agreement of January 21, 1952, further recited that Sharp had executed a will providing for the cancellation of said indebtedness which might be owing from Kennedy to Sharp upon Sharp's death. The agreement further provided that Kennedy, upon Sharp's death would purchase Sharp's undivided one-half interest in a building owned by them as tenants in common for the stipulated price of $3,500.

On December 8, 1954, Martin B. Kennedy died, leaving a last will and testament naming his widow, Grace Kennedy, the defendant herein, sole legatee and devisee. On February 10, 1955, judgment by confession was entered against Grace Kennedy in the amount of $9,881.49 and costs of suit. On March 21, 1955, Charles L. Sharp died.

From the pleadings and from the language of the agreement, this court must conclude that a will was executed by Sharp incorporating the provisions of the agreement of January 21, 1952. However, this will is not in evidence and does not appear to have been probated, but a will bearing a later date was probated.

While a number of grounds are urged by each party, it would seem to this court that two questions are at issue, namely, was the affidavit of Patricia Kennedy Hutson, supporting the motions of the defendant sufficient under the rules, and was the said Patricia Kennedy Hutson a competent person to make such affidavit. Or to state it otherwise, if she was competent to make the affidavit, then the only question would be as to the sufficiency of the affidavit. The other matters were not urged before the trial court and will not be considered by this court on appeal.

Taking up first the question of the competency of Patricia Kennedy Hutson as a witness under Section 2 of the Evidence Act, Chapter 51, Illinois Revised Statutes, 1953, the plaintiff questions her competency on the ground that she is an interested person. In support of this position plaintiff cites said Section 2 of the Evidence Act and Bellman v. Epstein, 279 Ill. 34, 116 N.E. 707. Section 2 of the Evidence Act provides that: 'No party to any civil action, suit or proceeding, or person directly interested in the event thereof, shall be allowed to testify therein of his own motion, or in his own behalf, * * * when any adverse party sues or defends * * * as the executor, administrator, heir, legatee or devisee of any deceased person, * * *.' It will be noted that this prohibition only applies to a person who is directly interested.

The case of Bellman v. Epstein, 279 Ill. 34, 116 N.E. 707, 708, cited by the plaintiff, does not support the plaintiff's contention that a daughter of an interested person would be incompetent. In that case, the Court said: 'The interest which disqualifies a witness must be some legal, certain, and immediate interest.' Here Patricia Kennedy Hutson was a daughter of Martin B. Kennedy and Grace Kennedy. Martin B. Kennedy was dead and by his will had left his entire estate to his widow, Grace Kennedy. This daughter had no legal, certain or immediate...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Harper v. Kennedy
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • September 18, 1958
    ...motion appealed to the Appellate Court which reversed the trial court, opened the judgment, and granted such leave. Sharp v. Kennedy, 12 Ill.App.2d 353, 139 N.E.2d 594. In the interim, Sharp died and his executor was substituted in his stead. The executor, together with Sharp's heirs and de......
  • National Boulevard Bank of Chicago v. Corydon Travel Bureau, Inc.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • April 15, 1968
    ...the evidence set forth in the affidavit to determine if such evidence would be admissible at a trial on the merits. Sharp v. Kennedy, 12 Ill.App.2d 353, 139 N.E.2d 594 (1957). The affidavit in support of the motion to open the judgment entered by confession alleges that Corydon Travel Burea......
  • Marriage Cinque R. v. & Janeen W.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • August 4, 2016
    ...LLC, 2014 IL App (1st) 123784, ¶ 102. The filing of the amended motion in effect superseded the original motion. Sharp v. Kennedy, 12 Ill. App. 2d 353, 362 (1957). Petitioner waived any argument concerning the April 2014 motion when petitioner's counsel filed the amended motion in May 2015.......

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