¶1dissenting: I concur in the conclusion reached by this opinion and with the general tenor of the reasoning, but this' court has no jurisdiction to entertain the cause unless a constitutional question is involved, and if it is involved, the constitutional question ought to be discussed and disposed of. This opinion does not do so.
192 Ill. 206
Andel v. Starkel
Decided October 24, 1901
Illinois Supreme Court · decided 1901-10-24
<p>1. Equity—party cannot resort to equity if relief at lam is adequate. A bill by a county treasurer to enjoin the members of a grand jury from collecting their certificates cannot be maintained where the facts relied upon in the bill could be set up in defense of mandamus or other legal proceedings to collect such certificates.</p> <p>2. Same—mhen equity is not justified in taking jurisdiction to avoid a multiplicity of suits. Equity is not justified in taking jurisdiction of a bill to enjoin mandamus upon the ground that a multiplicity of suits will be avoided, where complainant’s allegation that he is threatened with a multiplicity of suits is denied by the answer, and the proof is positive that but one suit has been brought and that the parties having similar rights are willing to abide by the result.</p>
Decided 1901-10-24