Parr v. Van Horn

Citations

• 38 Ill. 226

Syllabus

<p>1. Pleading—declaration in ejectment. A declaration in ejectment which alleges that the plaintiff was in possession, and was dispossessed, on the -day of September, 1862, without specifying the day of the month, is sufficient after judgment, although the omission of the averment that plaintiff was in possession on a specified day would, undoubtedly, be ground of special demurrer.</p> <p>2. An allegation that the plaintiff was seized in fee simple, is a sufficient _ allegation of his right of possession.</p> <p>3. Same—description of premises. When the premises can be found and located by the description given in the declaration, that is sufficient.</p> <p>4. So, it is enough to describe the land by the part of the quarter section, the section, township, range and meridian.</p> <p>5. Arrest of judgment. If no motion in arrest of judgment is made in the court below, reasons for the arrest can not be urged on error.</p> <p>6. Upon motion in arrest of judgment upon a declaration alleging that the plaintiff was seized on the-day of September, 1862; and was ousted in the same month, the court will presume that the proof established a seizin prior to the ouster. ,e</p> <p>7. Writ of possession—motion to quash. If a writ of possession is defective, a motion to quash it must be made in the court below before its insufficiency can be assigned as error.</p>