In re Meinhardt

Appellate Court of Illinois

In re Meinhardt

202 Ill. App. 266, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 911

Appellate Court of Illinois·Decided December 19, 1916·No. Gen. No. 21,879·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Execution, § 295*—what is not conclusive as to whether malice was gist of action. The mere fact that the statement of claim, filed in an action in which a capias ad satisfaciendum issued, does not disclose that malice was of the gist of the action does not entitle an insolvent debtor to release from imprisonment under such an execution, since the evidence offered on the trial may have been sufficient to support the judgment on which the capias was issued.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Execution, § 295*—what is not conclusive as to whether malice was gist of action. The mere fact that the statement of claim, filed in an action in which a capias ad satisfaciendum issued, does not disclose that malice was of the gist of the action does not entitle an insolvent debtor to release from imprisonment under such an execution, since the evidence offered on the trial may have been sufficient to support the judgment on which the capias was issued.

In re Meinhardt, 202 Ill. App. 266, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 911 (Ill. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

202 Ill. App. 266 (In re Meinhardt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related