Arnold v. Kilchman

Appellate Court of Illinois

Arnold v. Kilchman

76 Ill. App. 665, 1898 Ill. App. LEXIS 189

DecidedJune 21, 1898

StatusPublished

This text of 76 Ill. App. 665 (Arnold v. Kilchman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arnold v. Kilchman, 76 Ill. App. 665, 1898 Ill. App. LEXIS 189 (Ill. Ct. App. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Horton

delivered the opinion of the court.

This appeal must be dismissed for the reason that there is no judgment against appellants. -The suit was brought against the four appellants, Adolph Arnold, Theodore-Arnold, Herman Arnold and Benjamin F. Baker, together with Gustav A. Bodenschatz and Arthur J. Howe. Upon the trial the jury returned a verdict finding the issues, joined between appellee and appellants, for the appellee, and assessing appellee’s damages only against said Bodenschatz and Howe. The damages thus assessed are for the sum of $532.39. A motion for a new trial, apparently by all of the defendants below, was overruled. Judgment was thereupon entered against the defendants Bodenschatz and Howe, and against.them only. This record shows no judgment of any kind against the appellants. Bodenschatz and Howe do not, nor does either one of them, join in this appeal. Although a person be a party defendant to a suit in which a judgment is entered against'his co-defendant, he can not appeal when there is no judgment of any kind against him.

This appeal from the Circuit Court will be dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Justice Horton

delivered the opinion of the court.

This appeal must be dismissed for the reason that there is no judgment against appellants. -The suit was brought against the four appellants, Adolph Arnold, Theodore-Arnold, Herman Arnold and Benjamin F. Baker, together with Gustav A. Bodenschatz and Arthur J. Howe. Upon the trial the jury returned a verdict finding the issues, joined between appellee and appellants, for the appellee, and assessing appellee’s damages only against said Bodenschatz and Howe. The damages thus assessed are for the sum of $532.39. A motion for a new trial, apparently by all of the defendants below, was overruled. Judgment was thereupon entered against the defendants Bodenschatz and Howe, and against.them only. This record shows no judgment of any kind against the appellants. Bodenschatz and Howe do not, nor does either one of them, join in this appeal. Although a person be a party defendant to a suit in which a judgment is entered against'his co-defendant, he can not appeal when there is no judgment of any kind against him.

This appeal from the Circuit Court will be dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

76 Ill. App. 665, 1898 Ill. App. LEXIS 189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arnold-v-kilchman-illappct-1898.