Mills v. Heeney

35 Ill. 173
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedApril 15, 1864
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 35 Ill. 173 (Mills v. Heeney) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mills v. Heeney, 35 Ill. 173 (Ill. 1864).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Beckwith

delivered the opinion of the Court:

An established rule of practice in this State requires decrees in chancery, directing the sale of real estate for the non-payment of money, to give at least ninety days for its payment where there is no right of redemption from the sale. 24 Ill. 551; 27 id. 497; ib. 23; 28 id. 457.

A decree in a suit to enforce a mechanic’s lien should not be rendered for a larger sum than is claimed by the petition, and interest from the time it was filed, where it asserts no claim for interest. 29 Ill. 500; 17 How. 17. In other respects the decree of the court below was correct. It will be reversed and the cause remanded.

Decree reversed.

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

Related

Young v. Young
179 Iowa 1259 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1917)
Walsh v. North American Cold Storage Co.
260 Ill. 322 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1913)
St. Johns & Halifax Railroad v. Bartola
28 Fla. 82 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1891)
Vail v. Drexel
9 Ill. App. 439 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1881)
Race v. Sullivan
1 Ill. App. 94 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1878)
Johnson v. Boudry
116 Mass. 196 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1874)
Heiman v. Schrœder
74 Ill. 158 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1874)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 Ill. 173, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mills-v-heeney-ill-1864.