Matson v. Connelly
24 Ill. 142
Opinion
There was no necessity for amending this verdict in the court below. The defect is cured by our statute of amendments and jeofails.
Error having been joined, the motion to dismiss the appeal comes too late. It would have prevailed if made in the first instance, as the judgment does not amount to twenty dollars, exclusive of costs, nor does it relate to a franchise or freehold.
The judgment is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Matson v. Connelly, 24 Ill. 142 (Ill. 1860).
24 Ill. 142 (Matson v. Connelly) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Fread v. Hoag
132 Ill. App. 233 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1907)
West Chicago St. R. R. v. Horne
100 Ill. App. 259 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1902)
Daft v. Drew
40 Ill. App. 266 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1891)
Kane v. People
13 Ill. App. 382 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1883)
Goodrich v. City of Omaha
11 Neb. 204 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1881)
City of Pekin v. Winkel
77 Ill. 56 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1875)