Douglass v. Martin

Citations

• 103 Ill. 25
• 1882 Ill. LEXIS 138

Syllabus

<p>1. Chancery jurisdiction—when there is a complete remedy at law. The general rule, subject to a few exceptions, is, that a court of chancery is prohibited from entertaining -jurisdiction in all cases when the plaintiff has a complete and adequate remedy at law. When the court of law has jurisdiction, the complainant must show that his case falls within the exception, to entitle him to relief in equity.</p> <p>2. Same—under the head of trust. Where a friend of one under indictment places money in the hands of another, under a contract that if an attorney shall procure the acquittal of the accused, or his discharge from arrest, by habeas corpus or otherwise, the depositary is to pay the amount thereof to the attorney, otherwise to return the same to the person depositing it, there is no such a trust created as to entitle the attorney to sue for and recover the sum promised him, in a court of equity, the remedy being adequate at law.</p> <p>3. Trust—to give a court of equity jurisdiction. The mere delivery, of property or money to one to be held by him until the performance of an act by another, when it is to be paid over to such other person, otherwise returned, does not, independent of other equitable circumstances, necessarily create a trust. It must either vest an equitable title in or create a lien in favor of the beneficiary, and this must be by agreement of the parties, or under such circumstances as equity will declare a lien exists.</p>