Mooers v. Dixon

35 Ill. 208
Illinois Supreme Court·Decided April 15, 1864·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Mr. Justice Breese

delivered the opinion of the Court:

It is impossible to distinguish this case in principle from the case of Wing v. Chopper and wife, post, 256, or from the case of Hoskins v. Litchfield, therein referred to, reported in 31 Ill. 137. On the authority of these cases the sale will be set aside, and the master in chancery of Lee county directed to sell the premises under the homestead act. The decree of foreclosure will not be disturbed. See, also, Moore v. Titman, 33 Ill. 358.

The decree dismissing the complainants’ bill is reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to the Circuit Court to set aside the sale and direct the master to sell the premises, in the mode pointed out by the homestead act.

Decree reversed.

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

Mooers v. Dixon, 35 Ill. 208 (Ill. 1864).

35 Ill. 208 (Mooers v. Dixon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

The PEOPLE v. Allen
226 N.E.2d 1 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1967)
Heirs of Hastings v. Dorrance
2 Ill. Cir. Ct. 300 (Illinois Circuit Court, 1904)
Motley v. Motley
73 N.W. 738 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1898)
Hooper v. Castetter
63 N.W. 135 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1895)
Graham v. Culver
29 P. 270 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1892)
Asher v. Mitchell
92 Ill. 480 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1879)
Allen v. Hawley
66 Ill. 164 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1872)
Hubbell v. Canady
58 Ill. 425 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1871)
Conklin v. Foster
57 Ill. 104 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1870)