Trustees of Sch. v. Hoyt, 16382.

CourtSupreme Court of Illinois
Writing for the CourtDUNN
Citation148 N.E. 867,318 Ill. 60
Docket NumberNo. 16382.,16382.
Decision Date08 October 1925

318 Ill. 60
148 N.E. 867


No. 16382.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June 18, 1925.
Rehearing Denied Oct. 8, 1925.

Petition by the Trustees of Schools and others to condemn land of Norman C. Hoyt for schoolhouse site. Judgment for defendant, and petitioners appeal.


See, also, 311 Ill. 532, 143 N. E. 59.

[318 Ill. 60]Appeal from Champaign County Court; Roy C. Freeman, Judge.

Williamson & Winkelman, of Urbana, and Jones, McIntire & Jones and Hall & Holaday, all of Danville (O. M. Jones, of Danville, and A. R. Hall, of Chicago, of counsel), for appellants.

318 Ill. 61]Green & Palmer, of Urbana (Henry I. Green, Oris Barth, and Charles G. Howard, all of Urbana, of counsel), for appellee.

This cause was before the court at the December term, 1923. The proceeding was a petition to condemn land for a schoolhouse site. The owner of the land objected to the condemnation, because of the lack of the statutory conditions authorizing the exercise of the power of eminent domain; but his motion was denied, and after a trial a judgment of condemnation was rendered, from which he appealed. While other objections were raised on the record, the judgment of reversal was based solely on the lack of power of the board of education to call the election to vote on the proposition to locate and purchase a schoolhouse site, and the judgment of the county court was reversed, and the cause was remanded, with directions to dismiss the petition. On the reinstatement of the cause in the county court, the petitioners made a motion for leave to amend the petition and for another hearing, with leave to introduce further evidence. The defendant made a cross-motion for a judgment dismissing the petition. The court overruled the motion of the petitioners, and entered a judgment for the defendant, dismissing the petition.

[1] It has been held in numerous cases in this court that, where a judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded, with specific directions as to the action to be taken by the trial court, it is the duty of that court to follow those directions, and that it cannot err in doing so. Boggs v. Willard, 70 Ill. 315, 22 Am. Rep. 77;Windett v. Ruggles, 151 Ill. 184, 37 N. E. 1021;Roby v. Calumet & Chicago Canal & Dock Co., 154 Ill. 190, 40 N. E. 293. Where a cause is remanded by the Supreme Court, the trail court cannot err if it follows the opinion of the Supreme Court in the further proceedings of the case, and no attention will be given to arguments that it erred in so doing. [318 Ill. 62]Manternach v. Studt, 240 Ill. 464, 88 N. E. 1000,130 Am. St. Rep. 282. ‘A decree entered in accordance with the directions of this...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Mefford v. Gardner, 16692.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • August 17, 1967 the duty of the inferior court to strictly follow the directions contained in the mandate of this court." Trustees of Schools v. Hoyt, 318 Ill. 60, 148 N.E. Because of the clear error which we have pointed out, and which is in agreement with the judgment of the District Court, the follow......
  • Hardin v. Wolf, 16419.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • October 8, 1925
    ...agreement may be verbal, if it has been acted upon, and it need not be expressed, but will be readily implied, and enforced, if necessary[318 Ill. 60]to the protection of the parties. Arnold v. Arnold, 308 Ill. 365, 139 N. E. 592;Seals v. Treatch, 282 Ill. 167, 118 N. E. 422;Ingraham v. Mar......
  • Smith v. Dugger, 16797.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • October 28, 1925
    ...602;Noble v. Tipton, 222 Ill. 639, 78 N. E. 927;Manternach v. Stadt, 240 Ill. 464, 88 N. E. 1000;Trustees of Schools v. Hoyt (No. 16382) 318 Ill. 60, 148 N. E. 867. Where a decree has been reversed and the cause remanded, with specific directions for the entry of a decree, on an appeal from......
  • People ex rel. Campo v. Matchett, 29559.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • September 18, 1946
    ...of the inferior court to strictly follow the directions contained in the mandate of this court.’ See, also, Trustees of Schools v. Hoyt, 318 Ill. 60, 148 N.E. 867. The duty of the lower court to follow the mandate of the reviewing court may be enforced by mandamus. Wilson v. Fisher, 369 Ill......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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