Redfern v. Botham

70 Ill. App. 253, 1897 Ill. App. LEXIS 503
CourtAppellate Court of Illinois
DecidedMay 24, 1897
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 70 Ill. App. 253 (Redfern v. Botham) 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
Redfern v. Botham, 70 Ill. App. 253, 1897 Ill. App. LEXIS 503 (Ill. Ct. App. 1897).

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Shepard

delivered the opinion of the Court.

An action, which the evidence shows was in forcible detainer, was begun before a justice of the peace by the appellee against a “ Mrs. Redfern ” as defendant, and upon appeal to the Circuit Court leave was given to amend by changing the name of the defendant to that of the appellant, and a judgment for restitution of certain premises being there rendered, this appeal has followed.

The transcript of proceedings before the justice of the peace shows a “ complaint filed,” but no complaint in writing as required by the statute, or paper purporting to be one, was transmitted by the justice to the Circuit Court, and in that court no proof was made or offered that a written complaint ever did exist and no steps were taken to restore it if lost. The statement in the transcript, of a “ complaint filed,” is not sufficient to take the place of the writing that the statute requires must be filed with the justice in order to confer jurisdiction. A written complaint is necessary to the jurisdiction of the justice in forcible detainer proceedings, and unless the justice has jurisdiction, the Circuit Court on appeal has none. Chap. 57 Ill. Rev. Stat., Sec. 5; Abbott v. Kruse, 37 Ill. App. 549.

The want of jurisdiction appeared on the face of the common law record, and it was not necessary that a bill of exceptions should have been preserved, nor that anything which finds its appropriate place outside of the record proper should be made to appear.

The judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded, in order, if possible, that jurisdiction may be shown to have existed asa foundation for a valid judgment.

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

Related

Russell v. Howe
688 N.E.2d 375 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1997)
Menagh v. Hill
138 N.E.2d 707 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1957)
White v. Veitch
197 P. 983 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1921)
Stillo v. Pelletiere
140 Ill. App. 428 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1908)
Gibbs v. Van Derslice
134 Ill. App. 183 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1907)
Hawthorne v. Cartier Lumber Co.
121 Ill. App. 494 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1905)
Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad v. Olson
113 Ill. App. 320 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1904)
Olsen v. Stark
94 Ill. App. 556 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1901)
O'Brien v. Lynch
90 Ill. App. 26 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1900)
Bridge & Structural Iron Workers' Union v. Sigmund
88 Ill. App. 344 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
70 Ill. App. 253, 1897 Ill. App. LEXIS 503, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/redfern-v-botham-illappct-1897.