Seafkas v. Evey

29 Ill. 178
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedApril 15, 1862
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 29 Ill. 178 (Seafkas v. Evey) 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
Seafkas v. Evey, 29 Ill. 178 (Ill. 1862).

Opinion

Breese, J.

The testimony to prove the execution of this note, was by no means of a convincing character, and had we been sitting as jurors, should not have found the verdict. But though weak, it satisfied the jury, and we cannot well disturb their verdict.

Upon the other point, the justice of the peace had no jurisdiction of the note when it waé offered as a set-off in the case of Seafkas against Frantz, and no decision upon it could be a bar to a recovery in another suit.

After taking out the plaintiff’s claim in that suit, of sixty-six dollars, there still remained due on the note one hundred and seventy-two one-hundredth dollars, a sum beyond the jurisdiction of a justice. This was made up by interest arising on the note, and the holder is presumed to claim all he is entitled to, unless waived or released by him in some mode. There is no proof that the overplus beyond the magistrate’s jurisdiction was released, or intended to be, but it was claimed, and that would oust the magistrate’s jurisdiction. The judgment is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Marrese v. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons
628 F. Supp. 918 (N.D. Illinois, 1986)
Duresen v. Blackmarr
135 N.W. 530 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1912)
Hagerty v. Stalzenback
46 Ill. 303 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1867)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 Ill. 178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seafkas-v-evey-ill-1862.