Blair v. Reading

Illinois Supreme Court

Blair v. Reading

96 Ill. 130

CourtIllinois Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 15, 1880

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 96 Ill. 130 (Blair v. Reading) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Blair v. Reading, 96 Ill. 130 (Ill. 1880).

Pincite

Opinion

Craig, J.:

We do not understand it to be the duty of the plaintiff in error to file his abstracts and briefs, unless the other party is in court. The plaintiff was present in court on the day the cause was called, and had no notice, or any evidence that there had been any service. Under the circumstances the plaintiff in error can not be considered as in default by reason of not having filed his abstracts and briefs.

Motion denied.

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

Craig, J.:

We do not understand it to be the duty of the plaintiff in error to file his abstracts and briefs, unless the other party is in court. The plaintiff was present in court on the day the cause was called, and had no notice, or any evidence that there had been any service. Under the circumstances the plaintiff in error can not be considered as in default by reason of not having filed his abstracts and briefs.

Motion denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 Ill. 130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blair-v-reading-ill-1880.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack