Wakefield v. Pennington

Appellate Court of Illinois

Wakefield v. Pennington

9 Ill. App. 374

DecidedOctober 6, 1881

StatusPublished

This text of 9 Ill. App. 374 (Wakefield v. Pennington) 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

Wakefield v. Pennington, 9 Ill. App. 374 (Ill. Ct. App. 1881).

Pincite

Opinion

Wall, J.

Defendant in error brought an action of assumpsit against plaintiff in error. The summons was duly served, and at the return term a default was entered and damages assessed at $324.44. The record fails to show that a declaration was ever filed in the case — rather, it shows that there was none —nor has a diminution been suggested or any reason for supposing that there was a declaration and that it has been misplaced. The judgment must therefore be reversed, and the cause remanded.

Eeversed and remanded.

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

Wall, J.

Defendant in error brought an action of assumpsit against plaintiff in error. The summons was duly served, and at the return term a default was entered and damages assessed at $324.44. The record fails to show that a declaration was ever filed in the case — rather, it shows that there was none —nor has a diminution been suggested or any reason for supposing that there was a declaration and that it has been misplaced. The judgment must therefore be reversed, and the cause remanded.

Eeversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 Ill. App. 374, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wakefield-v-pennington-illappct-1881.