Dunne v. Trustees of Schools
Citations
- 39 Ill. 578
Syllabus
<p>1. Forcible detainer—of the complaint. There is no precise form for a complaint in this action, nor ought unreasonable strictness be required. It is enough, if the complaint show the relation of landlord and tenant to have existed, that the time for which the premises were let has expired, and that the tenant persists in holding the premises after demand made in writing for the possession thereof.</p> <p>2. Practice—at what time objection must be tabeen to regularity of proceedings. Where the defendant, in an action of forcible detainer, appears and goes to trial in the Circuit Court, without objection to the regularity of the proceedings, he thereby admits their regularity, and the validity of the demand of possession. An objection to the form and mode of proceeding cannot be made for the first time in the Supreme Court.</p> <p>3. Landlord and tenant—when the relation exists. Where a party was permitted to go into possession of premises by the owner, without any terms of leasing being agreed upon, but under an agreement that the former would execute a lease for some definite time, which he afterward refused to do, and willfully remained in possession after having been duly notified to leave, and after demand in writing to quit and deliver up possession, it was held, the relation of landlord and tenant existed between the parties.</p> <p>4. Same—tenancy at will—what constitutes. Where a party is let into possession of premises under an agreement to take a lease, which he afterward refuses to do, he is a mere tenant at will after his refusal to make the lease.</p> <p>5. Notice to quit—under the act of 1861. The act of 1861, prescribing what notice shall be given a tenant in order to terminate the lease, has reference only to cases where the tenant holds over after his term is ended, and does not contemplate a tenancy at will.</p> <p>6. A tenancy at will is terminated by a demand of possession, without any notice to quit.</p> <p>7. Under the act of 1861, all tenanc
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- affirming bank larceny conviction where former employee of ATM servicer used a copy of the ATM key to take over $9,000 from ATM
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Breese
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.