Hall v. Reber

36 Ill. 483
Illinois Supreme Court·Decided January 15, 1865·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Mr. Justice Lawrence

delivered the opinion of the Court:

It is a misconception of the case of Harrison v. Chipp, 25 Ill. 579, to suppose that the court designed to decide anything further than that a justice of the peace cannot take a case under advisement indefinitely. He can unquestionably, like any other court, after the evidence and arguments of counsel are closed, adjourn the case for some fixed and reasonable time, to enable him to reflect upon the evidence or examine the law. It is merely necessary that the adjournment should be for a definite time, and should be announced in open court, that the parties may be present at the decision, in order to take such steps for the protection of their interests as they deem proper. In the case of Harrison v. Chipp there was an indefinite postponement. In the case at bar it was for a definite and reasonable time.

Judgment reversed.

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

Hall v. Reber, 36 Ill. 483 (Ill. 1865).

36 Ill. 483 (Hall v. Reber) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Clikeman v. Korf
35 N.E.2d 716 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1941)
Sales Method Co. v. City Meat Market
130 So. 536 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1930)
Colwell v. Swick
190 Ill. App. 369 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1914)
Sear v. C. C. Emerson & Co.
160 Ill. App. 276 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1911)
State ex rel. Collier v. Houston
92 P. 476 (Montana Supreme Court, 1907)
Murray Bros. v. Churchill & Co.
86 Ill. App. 480 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1899)
Sluga v. Walker
81 N.W. 282 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1899)
Treffert v. Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co.
36 Ill. App. 93 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1890)