Van Valkenburg v. Trustees of Schools
Citations
- 66 Ill. 103
Syllabus
<p>1. Decree pro coheesso—discretion of the court in requiring evidence. A party against whom a bill has been taken for confessed, can not assign as error that the proof does not sustain the allegations of the bill, it being a matter of discretion with the court whether it will require evidence to be produced.</p> <p>2. Judicial sales of land—when may be made era masse. When an officer charged with the sale of land under a decree of court, offers the premises in separate parcels and receives no bids, it is not error to then proceed to sell the same era masse.</p> <p>3. Error—by whom assignable. Parties against whom a decree was rendered sought to reverse the decree in toto, on the ground that there was error committed in rendering a decree against a co-defendant on whom there had been no service and for whom there was no appearance. The decree was not jointly against such person and the plaintiffs in error, and she was not bound with them to perform it, and the only interest she could have in the land in controversy, was a contingent dower interest: Held, that, under our practice, any error that might appear as to such person could not be taken advantage of by the plaintiffs in error.</p>
Judges: Scott
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.