Wade v. Halligan

Decision Date30 June 1855
Citation6 Peck 507,1855 WL 5475,16 Ill. 507
PartiesTHOMAS J. WADEv.PATRICK HALLIGAN.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

16 Ill. 507
1855 WL 5475 (Ill.)
6 Peck (IL) 507

THOMAS J. WADE
v.
PATRICK HALLIGAN.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June Term, 1855.


[16 Ill. 508]

THIS was a proceeding by a landlord against his tenant by distress.

The cause was heard before LELAND, Judge, at May term, 1854, of the La Salle Circuit Court. Proofs were heard, and a judgment rendered in favor of Halligan, the landlord, against Wade, the tenant. The latter prayed for and obtained this appeal. The following is the affidavit for a continuance referred to in the opinion of the court.

“Thomas J. Wade, being first duly sworn, saith on oath, that Conrad Birkell, T. D. Brewster, and C. A. Holmes, and John Hoffman, and Henry Fessler, who now reside in La Salle County, Illinois, are material witnesses for affiant on the trial of this cause, and who have each been duly subpœnaed to attend this court, as witnesses, for affiant in this case. Affiant expects and believes he can prove by said Birkell, that after the premises, for the rent of which the distress in this case was made, were leased to this affiant by said plaintiff, said plaintiff leased a room in said building to said Birkell, to be used as a place for the retailing of beer and spirituous liquor, commonly called a grocery. Affiant saith that the premises leased by said plaintiff to affiant, to recover the rent of which the distress in this case was made, were leased to affiant to be used as a hotel, and were so used by affiant. Affiant expects to prove by said Birkell, that the room leased to him for the purpose aforesaid, was in the same hotel building, occupied as aforesaid by affiant, and directly under the dining room of said hotel occupied by affiant. Affiant expects and believes that he can prove by said Birkell, that said room was rented to said Birkell by plaintiff, for the purposes aforesaid, contrary to the wish, and in despite of the remonstrance of affiant, made to said plaintiff before said room was rented by said plaintiff to said Birkell, and that said Birkell occupied said room by the leave of the said plaintiff during the whole quarter in which the rent, now sought to be recovered by the plaintiff in this case, is alleged to have accrued. Affiant expects and believes that he can prove by said John Hoffman, Henry Fessler and C. A. Holmes, each of them, that the use of said room, so rented and occupied by said Birkell, in said City Hotel, for the purpose of being used as a place for the retail of spirituous liquor and beer, commonly called a grocery, was necessarily, as said premises were situated, a very great injury to any person occupying the remainder of said premises for

[16 Ill. 509]

hotel purposes, or that part thereof occupied by affiant for a hotel, and that the value of said premises, occupied by affiant, was thereby depreciated, at least to the amount of one hundred dollars per quarter. Affiant saith, that under the lease upon which the rent accrued which the plaintiff now seeks to recover...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 cases
  • National Hollow Brake Beam Co. v. Bakewell
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 14, 1909
    ... ... 113 Mass. 481; Dexter v. Manley, 4 Cush. (Mass.) 14; ... Hubble v. Cole, 88 Vt. 236; Madox v ... Humphries, 24 Tex. 195; Wade v. Halligan, 16 ... Ill. 507; Field v. Herrick, 10 Ill.App. 591; ... Berrington v. Casey, 78 Ill. 317; Saratoga Hotel ... Co. v. Mossler, ... ...
  • Kemmerer v. Midland Oil & Drilling Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • December 21, 1915
    ... ... Dysart, 33 Pa. 452, 453; Maeder v. City of ... Carondelet, 26 Mo. 112, 114, 115; Hamilton v ... Wright's Adm'r, 28 Mo. 199, 205, 206; Wade ... v. Halligan, 16 Ill. 507, 511; Abrams v ... Watson, 59 Ala. 524; Pickett v. Ferguson, 45 ... Ark. 177, 199, 55 Am.Rep. 545; Field v ... ...
  • Allison v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • March 11, 1905
  • Nash v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • December 24, 1904
  • 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