Roberts v. Fahs
This text of 32 Ill. 474 (Roberts v. Fahs) 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.
Opinion
The statute is imperative, that if a non-resident plaintiff shall institute his suit without first having given a bond for costs, “ the court, on motion, shall dismiss the same.” Scates’ Comp. 244. A writ of error is considered as a new action, and the statute applies to all suits instituted in the Circuit or Supreme Court by non-resident plaintiffs. Ripley v. Morris, 2 Gilm. 382; Hickman, v. Haines, 5 id. 20.
The motion is in apt time. It is made before the time has passed for pleading in abatement, which is sufficient. Trustees v. Walters, 12 Ill. 154; Randolph v Emerick, 13 Ill. 346.
The rule will he entered. Rule nisi.
Afterwards, the plaintiff having failed to show cause against it, the rule was made absolute.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
32 Ill. 474, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberts-v-fahs-ill-1863.