Linton v. Quimby

Citations

• 57 Ill. 271

Syllabus

<p>1. Homestead—illegal sale of under execution—whether may he set aside as to part of the premises sold. Where it was sought to set aside a sale under execution, of four lots of ground, for the reason that, as claimed by the defendant in the execution, the same constituted his homestead, and had been sold without summoning a jury to set off the homestead, as required by the statute, it was held, the lots being sold separately, and the one on which his house was situated being worth more than $1000, a decree setting aside the sale as to such lot alone was proper, and gave to the complainant all the relief to which he was entitled.</p> <p>2. Though, had the lots been sold in a body, it would have been impossible to give this relief without setting aside the sale as to the other lots.</p> <p>3. Costs in chancery—against whom, should he adjudged. Where a complainant in chancery filed an amendment to his bill, for the purpose of correcting a mistake in the sheriff’s deed, under which he claimed title to the land in controversy, and the defendant filed across bill, the prayer of which was granted, but the court decreed to the complainant in the original bill partial relief, it was held erroneous to adjudge against the complainant in the cross bill the costs thereof, the same being necessary to the procurement of the relief obtained by it; and that the costs of the amendment to the original bill, although the relief sought by it was granted, should have been adjudged against the complainant therein, the error which it sought to correct not having been occasioned by the defendant, and he not resisting the correction in a way to make him chargeable with the costs.</p>