Katz v. Elia

Appellate Court of Illinois

Katz v. Elia

209 Ill. App. 300

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedJanuary 28, 1918

DocketGen. No. 23,516

StatusPublished

This text of 209 Ill. App. 300 (Katz v. Elia) 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

Katz v. Elia, 209 Ill. App. 300 (Ill. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion. of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Appeal and error, § 1098*—citing of authority. Sustaining authority should he cited upon legal propositions stated by counsel on appeal. 2. Judgment, § 277*—when discretion not abused in denying motion to vacate. A motion to vacate a judgment against a garnishee on the ground that there was a claim of attorney’s lien upon the judgment upon- which the garnishment proceeding was based and that notice of such claim was served prior to entry -of the judgment, but that the garnishee did not know the legal effect of the notice, held properly denied, and such denial not an abuse of discretion, as such evidence was not newly discovered, and if such claim was a defense it should have been interposed at the trial.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion. of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Appeal and error, § 1098*—citing of authority. Sustaining authority should he cited upon legal propositions stated by counsel on appeal. 2. Judgment, § 277*—when discretion not abused in denying motion to vacate. A motion to vacate a judgment against a garnishee on the ground that there was a claim of attorney’s lien upon the judgment upon- which the garnishment proceeding was based and that notice of such claim was served prior to entry -of the judgment, but that the garnishee did not know the legal effect of the notice, held properly denied, and such denial not an abuse of discretion, as such evidence was not newly discovered, and if such claim was a defense it should have been interposed at the trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 Ill. App. 300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/katz-v-elia-illappct-1918.