Bishop v. Nelson

83 Ill. 601
Illinois Supreme Court·Decided September 15, 1876·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The judgment in this case is reversed, on the

authority of Hoagland v. Creed, 81 Ill. 506, wherein it was held that parties could not stipulate to confer judicial functions upon an individual, and clothe him with judicial power. This was not an arbitration, Mr. Wood being the arbitrator mutually chosen, but it was an attempt to confer upon him the power of a judge, to decide the pending case, and he did decide it, the court carrying out his decision by entering the judgment he had reached, and not his own judgment. There is no authority for this proceeding, and the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded.

Judgment reversed.

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

Bishop v. Nelson, 83 Ill. 601 (Ill. 1876).

83 Ill. 601 (Bishop v. Nelson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wellness Int'l Network, Ltd. v. Sharif
575 U.S. 665 (Supreme Court, 2015)
Wellness International Network, Ltd. v. Sharif
575 U.S. 665 (Supreme Court, 2015)
In re Caffrey
52 A.D. 264 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)
People ex rel. v. Altgeld
43 Ill. App. 460 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1891)
Haverly Invincible Mining Co. v. Howcutt
4 Colo. L. Rep. 62 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1883)
Russell v. Sargent
7 Ill. App. 98 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1880)