Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

18 Ill. App. 56

Field v. Ridgley

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided December 4, 1885

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1885-12-04

<p>Assignment—Jurisdiction.—Where parties execute a voluntary assignment and the assignee takes possession ot the property, and under an order of the county court sells it and reports the proceeds to the court, complainants, who have proved their claims before the assignee, as required by law, can not file a bill in equity to investigate the good faith and validity of prior judgments. The jurisdiction of the whole subject is in the county court.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1891

1 state decisions

Relies on Freydendall v. Baldwin

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1885-12-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Conger, J.

¶1It appears from the bill filed in this case that on the 12th day of January, 1883, Kimbler, Ragsdale & Co. executed a voluntary assignment, and that the assignee took possession of the property, and under an order of the County Court of Sangamon county sold it and reported the proceeds to the court.

¶2That the complainants in the bill have proved their claims before the assignee as required by law, and now by this bill seek the aid of a court of chancery to investigate the good faith and validity of prior judgments obtained by Eidgley & Co., against Kimbler, Eagsdale & Co., and pray that the court will assume jurisdiction over the fund and make a proper and equitable distribution thereof.

¶3We are of opinion that this can not be done. The jurisdiction of the whole subject is in the County Court of Sangamon county. The whole matter is so fully and clearly discussed in the cases of Freydendall v. Baldwin, 103 Ill. 325, and Hanchett v. Waterbury, Legal News of August 15, 1885, that for us to do more than call attention to those cases would be a work of supererogation. See also Mersinger v. Yager, 16 Bradwell, 260.

¶4We are therefore of opinion that the circuit court committed no error in sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the bill.

¶5Affirmed.

/18/illapp/56 · .json · Public domain