Padfield v. Padfield

Illinois Supreme Court

Padfield v. Padfield

64 Ill. 166

DecidedJune 15, 1872

StatusPublished

This text of 64 Ill. 166 (Padfield v. Padfield) 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

Padfield v. Padfield, 64 Ill. 166 (Ill. 1872).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Breese

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was a bill in chancery, to correct a mistake in a deed, in which all the material facts alleged in the bill are admitted in the sworn answer of the plaintiff in error, and the court decreed accordingly.

We do not perceive any grounds for reversing the decree, as none of the facts are controverted, and it must be affirmed.

Decree affirmed.

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

Mr. Justice Breese

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was a bill in chancery, to correct a mistake in a deed, in which all the material facts alleged in the bill are admitted in the sworn answer of the plaintiff in error, and the court decreed accordingly.

We do not perceive any grounds for reversing the decree, as none of the facts are controverted, and it must be affirmed.

Decree affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 Ill. 166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/padfield-v-padfield-ill-1872.