Posey v. Commissioners of Highways

Appellate Court of Illinois

Posey v. Commissioners of Highways

196 Ill. App. 597

DecidedDecember 1, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 196 Ill. App. 597 (Posey v. Commissioners of Highways) 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

Posey v. Commissioners of Highways, 196 Ill. App. 597 (Ill. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Higbee

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Estoppel, § 60*—when property owner estopped to complain as to location of road. One who has consented to the location of a road through his land cannot be heard to complain when the highway commissioners act on his consent and locate the road. 3. Injunction, § 114*—when prosecution of action at law should not he restrained. In a bill to restrain highway commissioners from encroaching on plaintiff’s land and from removing fences and cutting down' trees along a line of road, held improper to restrain defendants from prosecuting a suit at law to recover a penalty in which defendants are entitled to a jury, where the main relief sought in the bill was refused on the ground that complainant was estopped to complain of the acts sought to be restrained. 4. Equity, § 9*—when penalty will not he enforced in equity. The matters involved in an action at law to recover a penalty where parties are entitled to a jury trial cannot be satisfactorily adjusted in a suit in equity brought to restrain the prosecution of such action.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Higbee

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Estoppel, § 60*—when property owner estopped to complain as to location of road. One who has consented to the location of a road through his land cannot be heard to complain when the highway commissioners act on his consent and locate the road. 3. Injunction, § 114*—when prosecution of action at law should not he restrained. In a bill to restrain highway commissioners from encroaching on plaintiff’s land and from removing fences and cutting down' trees along a line of road, held improper to restrain defendants from prosecuting a suit at law to recover a penalty in which defendants are entitled to a jury, where the main relief sought in the bill was refused on the ground that complainant was estopped to complain of the acts sought to be restrained. 4. Equity, § 9*—when penalty will not he enforced in equity. The matters involved in an action at law to recover a penalty where parties are entitled to a jury trial cannot be satisfactorily adjusted in a suit in equity brought to restrain the prosecution of such action.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

196 Ill. App. 597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/posey-v-commissioners-of-highways-illappct-1915.