Tuttle v. Garrett

Decision Date30 June 1855
PartiesJOHN G. TUTTLE et al.v.AUGUSTUS O. GARRETT.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

16 Ill. 354
1855 WL 5435 (Ill.)
6 Peck (IL) 354

JOHN G. TUTTLE et al.
v.
AUGUSTUS O. GARRETT.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June Term, 1855.


Error to Peoria.

In an application for a decree against infants for a conve yance of land nothing will be taken as admitted, but complete proof must be made as against them.

CITED: 18 Ill. 81; 23 Ill. 38, [35]; 27 Ill. 149; 43 Ill. 249; 47 Ill. 416.

THE decree in this case was rendered by PETERS, Judge, at a special term of the Peoria Circuit Court, in March, 1855.

N. H. PURPLE and E. N. POWELL, for Plaintiffs in Error.MANNING and MERRIMAN, for Defendant in Error.

CATON, J.

The bill in this case shows that Garrett executed a deed of the premises in question to Tuttle, the father of the defendant, for the purpose of securing him against any loss which he might sustain by reason of his having become security for Garrett in certain transactions, particularly specifying an appeal bond which Tuttle had signed, as security for Garrett, for the purpose of appealing a certain case from the circuit to the supreme court, in which case, the bill shows that the supreme court rendered a decree against Garrett for over $1200. And also to indemnify Tuttle for any loss which he might sustain by reason of his having become security for Garrett to Kidder, for several hundred dollars. The bill further avers, that Garrett

[16 Ill. 355]

has since paid off and satisfied both these demands, by reason of which, he is entitled to have the premises conveyed to him by the defendants...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Hemmer v. Wolfer
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 12 Mayo 1887
  • Tymony v. Tymony
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 25 Octubre 1928
  • Lalakea v. Laupahoehoe Sugar Co.
    • United States
    • Hawaii Supreme Court
    • 15 Diciembre 1939
    ...8 Ohio 377; Shultz v. Sanders, 38 N. J. Eq. 156; Stinson v. Pickering, 70 Me. 273; Crain v. Parker, 1 Ind. 374; Tuttle v. Garrett, 16 Ill. 354; Holden v. Hearn, 1 Beavan 445; Claxton v. Claxton, 56 Mich. 557, 23 N.W. 310. The same doctrine has been held by the federal courts. In Kingsbury v......
  • Lalakea v. Laupahoehoe Sugar Co.
    • United States
    • Hawaii Supreme Court
    • 15 Diciembre 1939
  • 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