Frick v. Trustees of Schools

Appellate Court of Illinois

Frick v. Trustees of Schools

7 Ill. App. 403, 1880 Ill. App. LEXIS 243

DecidedDecember 4, 1880

StatusPublished

This text of 7 Ill. App. 403 (Frick v. Trustees of Schools) 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

Frick v. Trustees of Schools, 7 Ill. App. 403, 1880 Ill. App. LEXIS 243 (Ill. Ct. App. 1880).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This was a bill in equity seeking to enjoin an ejectment suit pending, wherein plaintiff in error, William Frick, was plaintiff, and defendants in error were 'defendants, wherein plaintiff in error sought to recover the possession of the land in question, being a school house site.

The bill shows that William Frick was one of the heirs-at-law of Frederick Frick, deceased. That in the life-time of Frederick Frick, deceased, the school directors, by parol contract purchased the real estate in question of him and took possession under the purchase, made valuable improvements and paid the purchase money, and ask the court to compel conveyance and decree perpetual injunction against the prosecution of the ejectment suit, all of which relief the court by decree granted. A freehold estate being involved in this controversy, this court has no jurisdiction. The writ of error should have been sued out of the Supreme Court under Sec. 2, act concerning appeals. Laws 1879, p. 222. See Patterson v. McKinney, 6 Bradwell 394.

The writ of error is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Writ dismissed.

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

Per Curiam.

This was a bill in equity seeking to enjoin an ejectment suit pending, wherein plaintiff in error, William Frick, was plaintiff, and defendants in error were 'defendants, wherein plaintiff in error sought to recover the possession of the land in question, being a school house site.

The bill shows that William Frick was one of the heirs-at-law of Frederick Frick, deceased. That in the life-time of Frederick Frick, deceased, the school directors, by parol contract purchased the real estate in question of him and took possession under the purchase, made valuable improvements and paid the purchase money, and ask the court to compel conveyance and decree perpetual injunction against the prosecution of the ejectment suit, all of which relief the court by decree granted. A freehold estate being involved in this controversy, this court has no jurisdiction. The writ of error should have been sued out of the Supreme Court under Sec. 2, act concerning appeals. Laws 1879, p. 222. See Patterson v. McKinney, 6 Bradwell 394.

The writ of error is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Writ dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 Ill. App. 403, 1880 Ill. App. LEXIS 243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frick-v-trustees-of-schools-illappct-1880.