Fanning v. Russell
Citations
- 94 Ill. 386
Syllabus
<p>1. Appeal—when it lies from. Appellate Court. Where the judgment of the Appellate Court is such that no further proceedings can be bad in t.lie circuit court, except to carry into effect the mandate of the Appellate Court, and the litigation involves a freehold, an appeal lies to this court from the judgment or decree of the Appellate Court.</p> <p>2. Practice in Supreme Court—reviewing facts found by Appellate Court. The provision in the Practice act making the findings' of fact, by the Appellate Court, conclusive .on error or appeal to this court., has no application to chancery cases; and it is the duty of this court to review the evidence as to the facts found which constitute the basis of the decree. o</p> <p>3. Chancery practice—trial of feigned issue. Where a doubtful question of fact arises, it may be referred tó a jury on a feigned issue. The verdict in such case is to satisfy the conscience of the chancellor, and if he is riot satisfied, he may disregard it, and either direct a new trial or find the facts himself. This is the practice in the courts of England as well as in our courts. '</p> <p>4. If a party is not satisfied with the verdict, of the jury, on the trial of a feigned issue out. of chancery, he should make his objections at the earliest possible opportunity, and in the court in which the error has intervened; and if he makes no objection in the court below, he will be regarded as acquiescing in the finding of the facts.</p> <p>5. Frauuulent conveyance—when grantor retains enough to pay his debts. A voluntary conveyance of lands by a father to his sons, by way of advancement, will not be fraudulent as to creditors of the father, if he retains ample means and property to pay all debts and liabilities.</p> <p>6. Gift—taking notes in child’s name is not a gift. The taking of a note by a father in his daughter’s name as payee, with the intention of making a gift to the daughter, gives the latter no vested interest in the note before its delivery
Judges: Scott
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
20 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Telford v. PattonIllinois Supreme Court· 1892-11-03· cited 67×
- Bolton v. BoltonIllinois Supreme Court· 1923-02-21· cited 31×
- Hatton v. JonesIndiana Supreme Court· 1881-11-15· cited 16×
- Bittinger v. KastenIllinois Supreme Court· 1884-09-27· cited 15×
- Moore v. TierneyIllinois Supreme Court· 1881-09-26· cited 13×
- Johnson v. FarrellIllinois Supreme Court· 1905-06-23· cited 12×
- Riehl v. RiehlIllinois Supreme Court· 1910-12-21· cited 11×
- Henry v. CaruthersIllinois Supreme Court· 1902-04-16· cited 10×
- Berry v. BerryAppellate Court of Illinois· 1925-10-27· cited 7×
- Tucker v. ColeIllinois Supreme Court· 1897-11-08· cited 4×
- Russell v. EplerAppellate Court of Illinois· 1882-02-03· cited 3×
- Brown v. Miner, Frost & HubbardAppellate Court of Illinois· 1886-05-21· cited 3×
- Fanning v. RussellAppellate Court of Illinois· 1886-08-26· cited 2×
- May v. MayAppellate Court of Illinois· 1890-06-13· cited 2×
- Johnson v. JohnsonAppellate Court of Illinois· 1929-08-12· cited 2×
- Rogerson v. FanningIllinois Supreme Court· 1896-11-10· cited 1×
- Dobbins v. CrugerAppellate Court of Illinois· 1882-08-08· cited 1×
- Owens v. OwensAppellate Court of Illinois· 1894-12-13· cited 1×
- Telford v. PattonAppellate Court of Illinois· 1892-02-26
- Rengel v. SchodenAppellate Court of Illinois· 1913-03-12
Other cases named Fanning v. Russell
2 other CourtListener records share this case name.
Sourced 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.