Mississippi Lumber Co. v. Joice

Appellate Court of Illinois

Mississippi Lumber Co. v. Joice

176 Ill. App. 108, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 36

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedDecember 30, 1912

DocketGen. No. 15,957

StatusPublished

This text of 176 Ill. App. 108 (Mississippi Lumber Co. v. Joice) 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

Mississippi Lumber Co. v. Joice, 176 Ill. App. 108, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 36 (Ill. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.

The decree in the above-entitled cause is reviewed and as modified affirmed in Mississippi Lumber Co. v. Joice, post, 110, in an opinion filed this date, to which we refer for a more detailed statement of the case and the issues involved. The said decree was in part as follows; “That the cross-bill herein is not germane to the original bill, and is without equity, and that the same should be and is dismissed for want of equity.” The cross-complainants bring this appeal to reverse the said decree only as to the dismissing of the said cross-bill. By the cross-bill the cross-complainants sought to recover individually the secret profit claimed to have been made by Joice, Pope and Pate in the transaction in question; but it is stated by them that if this court affirms the decree finding that the Mississippi Lumber Company is entitled to the relief therein ordered, it is not their desire to urge the reversal here sought.. However, we think that the cross-bill was properly dismissed as not germane to the original bill, and the decree as here appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.

The decree in the above-entitled cause is reviewed and as modified affirmed in Mississippi Lumber Co. v. Joice, post, 110, in an opinion filed this date, to which we refer for a more detailed statement of the case and the issues involved. The said decree was in part as follows; “That the cross-bill herein is not germane to the original bill, and is without equity, and that the same should be and is dismissed for want of equity.” The cross-complainants bring this appeal to reverse the said decree only as to the dismissing of the said cross-bill. By the cross-bill the cross-complainants sought to recover individually the secret profit claimed to have been made by Joice, Pope and Pate in the transaction in question; but it is stated by them that if this court affirms the decree finding that the Mississippi Lumber Company is entitled to the relief therein ordered, it is not their desire to urge the reversal here sought.. However, we think that the cross-bill was properly dismissed as not germane to the original bill, and the decree as here appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

176 Ill. App. 108, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 36, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mississippi-lumber-co-v-joice-illappct-1912.