City of Chicago v. McGraw
Citations
- 75 Ill. 566
Syllabus
<p>1. Party plaintiff at law—when the wife may sue alone for injury to real estate. Where a husband, being the owner of real estate, together with Ms wife, in 1859, conveyed the same to a son, who, in 1863, conveyed the same to the wife, who was his mother, and she afterward controlled the same in her own right, it was held, that the wife could maintain an action in her own name, for an injury to the property, without joining her husband in the action as a plaintiff.</p> <p>2. Married woman—what regarded as her separate property, under aet of 1861. Where a husband and wife conveyed land of the former to their son, and he conveyed the same back to the wife, it was held, that the wife acquired the title from a person other than her husband, and that the good faith of the transaction could only be questioned by creditors of the husband. A trespasser cannot question the wife’s right to the land as her separate property, in an action by her against him.</p> <p>3. Municipal corporation — when liable for trespass. Trespass lies against a municipal corporation in a proper case; but to render it liable in any case for torts committed by persons claiming to act for it, or by its authority, it must appear they were expressly authorized to do the act, by the municipal government, or that they were done bona fide, in pursuance of a general authority to act for the municipality on the subject to which they relate, or that, in either case, the act was adopted and ratified by the corporation.</p> <p>4. Where the city of Chicago was sued in trespass for an injury to a lot of the plaintiff, caused by widening and deepening a canal, which the city was empowered to do, but no ordinance of the city was introduced showing that the city had undertaken to exercise the power, and the written contract of the parties doing the work which caused the injury was not produced on the trial, and there was no proof that the city directed the work, or adopted and ratified it afterward, it was held, t
Judges: Scholfield
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.