Moore-Bond Co. v. Attractograph Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Moore-Bond Co. v. Attractograph Co.

181 Ill. App. 513, 1913 Ill. App. LEXIS 302

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedJune 30, 1913

DocketGen. No. 16,569

StatusPublished

This text of 181 Ill. App. 513 (Moore-Bond Co. v. Attractograph Co.) 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

Moore-Bond Co. v. Attractograph Co., 181 Ill. App. 513, 1913 Ill. App. LEXIS 302 (Ill. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Baker

delivered the opinion of the court.

The evidence in this case is not before us.

The objection that the placita does not show a properly constituted court is cured by the additional placita which shows that the judge who presided at the trial was the county judge of Schuyler county and sat in the Municipal Court at the request of the judges of that court.

The contention that the record shows no judgment is without merit. The judgment order contained some words which have no proper place in the order. Rejecting such words as surplusage, there is left a judgment in proper form.

The statute does not require the Municipal Court to have a stenographer present at trials in that court to take notes of the evidence.

That the Municipal Court Act is constitutional is settled by repeated decisions of the Supreme Court.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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