Village of Franklin Park v. Franklin

81 N.E. 1132, 228 Ill. 591
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1907
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 81 N.E. 1132 (Village of Franklin Park v. Franklin) 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
Village of Franklin Park v. Franklin, 81 N.E. 1132, 228 Ill. 591 (Ill. 1907).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Cartwright

announced the opinion of the court:

In this case the village of Franklin Park is the appellee, and it has entered a motion to expunge from the bill of exceptions that portion between pages 1 and 303. The ground of that motion is, that at the May term of the county court of Cook county the court heard what are termed “legal objections” to a special assessment, and on the 25th of May overruled the objections; that no bill of exceptions was taken at that term, and that the time was not extended by the court for the purpose of presenting and settling a bill of exceptions. The case was afterwards tried upon the question of benefits, at the June term, and then the final judgment confirming the assessment was entered and the bill of exceptions was filed in September, in accordance with an extension of time for that purpose. This bill of exceptions includes the proceedings upon the hearing of the legal objections at the May term, and under repeated decisions of this court the bill of exceptions must be taken at the term, or the time for settling it must be extended by the court. A bill of exceptions, on its face, purports to be taken at the time of the ruling excepted to, but by long established practice in this State the court is authorized to extend the time for the convenience of counsel, and if the time is extended the bill of exceptions may be signed and sealed within the time so extended.

The only ground upon which it is insisted that this bill of exceptions could be signed and sealed in September when the time was not extended at the May term is, that the order overruling the legal objections was not a final and appeal-able order. But that does not create any exception, to the general rule. The statute contemplates, and in fact provides, that the hearing of these cases shall be conducted as other cases at law, and the same rule must apply that applies in all other cases. Motions may be made and acted on in relation to process, to pleadings, or to almost any conceivable thing, in the course of legal proceedings, and the fact that the rulings cannot be appealed from and are not final in the case does not affect the question when tire bill of exceptions must be taken.

The motion must be sustained, and that portion of the bill of exceptions from pages 1 to 303 is expunged.

Motion allowed.

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

Related

Taylorville Sanitary District v. Nelson
166 N.E. 60 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1929)
Central Trust Co. v. Hagen
249 Ill. App. 507 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1928)
Weber v. Sneeringer
247 Ill. App. 294 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1928)
People v. Bither
231 Ill. App. 301 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1924)
North Richland Drainage District v. Karr
117 N.E. 770 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1917)
People v. May
114 N.E. 685 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1916)
Severy v. McDougall
190 Ill. App. 193 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1914)
Fry v. American Insurance
155 Ill. App. 384 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1910)
City of Chicago v. Hulbert
85 N.E. 222 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1908)
Schafer v. Gerbers
84 N.E. 1064 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
81 N.E. 1132, 228 Ill. 591, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/village-of-franklin-park-v-franklin-ill-1907.