Young v. Matthiesen & Hegeler Zinc Co.

105 Ill. 26, 1882 Ill. LEXIS 231
Illinois Supreme Court·Decided November 20, 1882·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Mr. Justice Scholfield

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This appeal is simply from an order of the court below refusing to allow the appellants to become parties defendant to a hill in chancery filed against other parties. No final decree has been entered in the case, and until such decree is entered how can it possibly be known- that this refusal has .prejudiced appellants’ rights? It may be that decree will accomplish, without appellants’ intervention, precisely what they claim ought to be done. The order is clearly interlocutory, and therefore not the subject of an appeal. Racine and Mississippi R. R. Co. v. Farmers' Loan and Trust Co. 70 Ill. 249; Gage v. Eich et al. 56 id. 297; Woodside v. Woodside, 21 id. 207.

The appeal must he dismissed, and it is so ordered.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Young v. Matthiesen & Hegeler Zinc Co., 105 Ill. 26, 1882 Ill. LEXIS 231 (Ill. 1882).

105 Ill. 26 (Young v. Matthiesen & Hegeler Zinc Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Board of Trustees v. Timpone
190 N.E.2d 786 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1963)
Pfeiffer v. Kemper
244 Ill. App. 474 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1927)