Skip to main content
· 1/25/1887

Gage v. Bissell

Citations

  • 119 Ill. 298
  • 10 N.E. 238

Syllabus

<p>^^-jurisdiction to settle conflicting titles. The statute relating to partitions gives the court power to determine the rights of the several parties under their title, whether in the same chain of title or emanating from other sources, as they may be made to appear.</p> <p>2. Same—parties—requisites of bill, as setting out the nature and extent of the various titles and interests invoiced. The statute imperatively requires the complainant in a bill for the partition of land, to make all persons interested therein, parties, and by apt averments to disclose the nature and extent of their title or interests; and this is more especially so when conflicting rights are to be determined, incumbrances apportioned, or clouds upon titles removed, or the like relief is sought.</p> <p>3. So a complainant seeking to set aside or impeach an adverse title, or to subordinate the same to his title, must state in his bill the nature of such adverse title, and the grounds of his right to equitable relief in regard thereto.</p> <p>4. Same—of partition without settling conflicting titles. While parties seeking the partition of land may have clouds upon their titles set aside, yet, upon failure of proof as to the invalidity of the adverse title sought to be impeached, they may dismiss their bill in so far as it seeks to set aside such adverse title, and still have partition, where no cross-bill is filed.</p> <p>5. A bill for partition sought to have two tax deeds for the premises set aside as clouds upon the title. On the hearing, the complainant gave evidence showing title in himself and another, and the invalidity of one of the tax titles, and neither party offered any evidence as to such other tax title, whereupon the court allowed the complainant to dismiss his bill in so far as it sought to set aside that tax title, and the court set aside the first named tax title, and decreed a partition: Held, that there was no error in the ruling of the court in allowing the dismissal and de

Judges: Shope

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.