Wolkau v. Wolkau
| Decision Date | 23 October 1917 |
| Docket Number | No. 11313.,11313. |
| Citation | 117 N.E. 426,280 Ill. 298 |
| Parties | WOLKAU v. WOLKAU. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Appellate Court, Third District, on Appeal from Circuit Court, McLean County; Colostin D. Myers, Judge.
Suit by Dore Wolkau against Fred Wolkau. Decree for plaintiff was reversed by the Appellate Court (202 Ill. App. 387), and plaintiff brings error. Dismissed.
Jordan & Jordan, Murray & Morrissey, and Fleming & Pratt, all of Bloomington, for plaintiff in error.
Sterling, Livingston & Whitmore, of Bloomington (Sigmund Livingston, of Chicago, of counsel), for defendant in error.
Defendant in error, Dore Wolkau, filed her suit in the McLean county circuit court December, 3, 1913, in an action of account, under section 1 of chapter 2 of our statutes (Hurd's Rev. St. 1915-16), against plaintiff in error, her husband. At the November term, 1914, of said court, on motion of defendant in error, the cause was transferred to the chancery side of said court with permission to defendant in error to file a bill in equity. She filed her bill, averring, in substance, that plaintiff in error had collected all the rents and profits on a certain three-story building located on a certain lot in the city of Bloomington since March, 1888, and had paid the taxes on said property, that there never had been a settlement or accounting between her and plaintiff in error, and that she had never received any rents or profits from said real estate except $45 paid to her by plaintiff in error December 21, 1908, and that the amount of rents collected by plaintiff in error was unknown to her. The prayer of the bill was for a discovery of all the rents and profits so received by plaintiff in error and for an accounting for the rents and profits collected by him during said time from said property, which she averred was owned by them as tenants in common in fee simple. Plaintiff in error filed a special demurrer, alleging as a special cause of demurrer that the recovery of the rents received by him on said property prior to the date of five years before the filing of said bill was barred by the five-year statute of limitations. The court sustained a demurrer to that part of the bill which sought to recover rent collected more than five years before the commencing of the suit, and overruled it as to the remainder of the bill. Plaintiff in error then filed an answer to the remainder of the bill, to which answer exceptions were interposed and overruled, and the court rendered a decree on the bill and answer in favor of defendant in error for $5,857.09. From that decree defendant in error appealed to the Appellate Court. At the October term, 1916, of that court the decree of the circuit court was reversed and the cause remanded, the remanding order being in this language:
‘That...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wolkau v. Wolkau, 13466.
...this court held that the judgment of the Appellate Court was not a final judgment, and dismissed the writ of error. Wolkau v. Wolkau, 280 Ill. 298, 117 N. E. 426. The remanding order of the Appellate Court on the first appeal was: ‘That this case be remanded to the circuit court for such ot......
-
Morris v. Beatty
...decree of the court below and remanded it generally was not a final judgment. Stripe v. Yager, 348 Ill. 362, 180 N.E. 915;Wolkau v. Wolkau, 280 Ill. 298, 117 N.E. 426; and it was held under such act that a judgment of the Appellate Court which reversed a judgment or decree of the trial cour......
- American Hard Rubber Co. v. Howe
-
Smith v. Bunge
...liability are determined by the order of the Appellate Court it is an interlocutory order and therefore not appealable. Wolkau v. Wolkau, 280 Ill. 298, 117 N. E. 426;People v. Stony Island State Savings Bank, 355 Ill. 401, 189 N. E. 267. The portion of the order of the Appellate Court which......