Wilson v. Moses

55 Ill. App. 230, 1894 Ill. App. LEXIS 386
Appellate Court of Illinois·Decided October 22, 1894·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Mr. Justice Gary

delivered the opinion oe the Court.

This was an appeal by the appellant here, from the judgment of a justice, perfected by filing the bond with him on the 16th of February, 1892, and the bond and transcript were filed in the Circuit Court March 10, 1892.

Mo appearance was filed by the appellees there nor here, and nothing done in the case until March 12, 1894, when the record states that the cause was called for trial and the appeal dismissed with procedendo, for want of prosecution, on motion of the plaintiffs’ attorney. This was regular. Bessy v. Ruhland, 33 Ill. App. 73.

The statement in the abstract—contrary to the record— that the dismissal was upon a preliminary call, can not be regarded. The appellant urges that the plaintiffs should have been required to prove up their cause, and were not entitled to a procedendo. The decisions are the other way. Reed v. Driscoll, 84 Ill. 96; Lawler v. Gordon, 91 Ill. 602.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Wilson v. Moses, 55 Ill. App. 230, 1894 Ill. App. LEXIS 386 (Ill. Ct. App. 1894).

55 Ill. App. 230 (Wilson v. Moses) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Marshall v. Lufkin
127 Ill. App. 595 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1906)