Seacord v. People
Citations
- 121 Ill. 623
- 13 N.E. 194
- 1887 Ill. LEXIS 963
Syllabus
<p>1. Nuisance—indictment therefor—its requisites. Generally, an indictment for a nuisance which charges the offence substantially in the language-of the statute, will be sufficient.</p> <p>2. An indictment for such offence will be sufficient if the acts constituting the alleged nuisance be set out with the detail and fullness required in respect of other offences,—that is, that the facts set out shall identify the transaction and affirmatively show prima facie guilt. When a thing is not a nuisance of itself, but becomes so by special circumstances, these must be alleged.</p> <p>3. An indictment charging that the defendant, on, etc., at, etc., unlawfully and willfully did cause and suffer the carcasses of divers dead animals, and a large quantity of offal, filth and noisome substances, then and during all the time aforesaid, and there to be collected, deposited and to remain near the dwelling houses of A, B, G, and others, there situate, and being then and', during all the time aforesaid, and there to the prejudice of the said A, B, 0, and others, and to the common nuisance of all the people there lawfully being and abiding, sufficiently describes the offence of nuisance under the first clause of section 221 of division 1 of the Criminal Code.</p> <p>4. Same—description of locality of nuisance. In an indictment for ■causing or suffering dead animals, etc., to be collected and remain near the dwellings of others, no other description of the locality of the place other than the venue laid in the proper county is necessary. If, however, the indictment is of a particular building or structure, which is sought to be removed or abated, its location must be set out with particularity; and so, also, where the locality becomes a part of the description of the offence.</p> <p>5. Same—of the intent to create a nuisance—whether material. Where a person causes or suffers the carcasses of dead animals to be collected, deposited or to remain in any place to the prejudice of others
Judges: Shops
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
14 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Village of Wilsonville v. SCA Services, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court· 1981-05-22· cited 99×
- City of Chicago v. Gunning SystemIllinois Supreme Court· 1905-04-17· cited 60×
- City of Chicago v. Commonwealth Edison Co.Appellate Court of Illinois· 1974-11-27· cited 32×
- Ehrlick v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1907-05-21· cited 22×
- Wente v. Commonwealth Fuel Co.Illinois Supreme Court· 1908-02-20· cited 16×
- Rhoades v. CookSupreme Court of Iowa· 1904-01-22· cited 12×
- Enright v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1920-11-09· cited 5×
- People v. DarrAppellate Court of Illinois· 1912-10-15· cited 4×
- People ex rel. Kocourek v. City of Chicago & Marshall FieldIllinois Supreme Court· 1901-12-18· cited 2×
- Deterding v. Central Illinois Public Service Co.Appellate Court of Illinois· 1923-10-26· cited 2×
- People ex rel. Gillham v. ArchibaldIllinois Supreme Court· 1913-04-19· cited 1×
- State v. Erie RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey· 1912-10-04· cited 1×
- People v. HensleyAppellate Court of Illinois· 1945-03-05· cited 1×
- People v. HuntAppellate Court of Illinois· 1933-11-22
Cites
4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Other cases named Seacord v. People
1 other CourtListener record shares 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.