Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

215 Ill. 119

Roberson v. Tippie

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided April 17, 1905

Illinois Supreme Court · decided 1905-04-17

<p>Appeals and errors—zvhen freehold is not involved. A freehold is not involved in a proceeding by an administratrix to sell land to pay debts unless some question is raised in regard to the title to the land, and is not involved where the only issue is whether there are valid claims unpaid authorizing sale of land to pay them.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently May 1930

2 state decisions

Relies on Lynn v. Lynn

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1905-04-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Justice Hand

¶1delivered the opinion of the court:

¶2This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court of Franklin county dismissing a petition to sell real estate to pay debts, filed by appellant, as administratrix of the estate of Levi Y. Roberson, deceased. The petition was filed originally in the county court of Franklin county. The judge of that court being a material and necessary witness, the proceeding was transmitted tó the circuit court of that county under section 69 of chapter 3 of Hurd’s Revised Statutes of 1903.

¶3It is admitted by appellees that deceased was, at the time of his death, the owner of the lands sought to be sold, and that Lydia L. Roberson is his widow and entitled to dower and homestead in said lands, but they, upon the trial below, contested the allowance of a claim in favor of appellant, and contended that there were no valid claims remaining unpaid against said estate which would' entitle the administratrix, under the law, to sell real estate to pay debts, and that said petition for that reason should be dismissed, which contention was sustained by the trial court and the petition dismissed, from which decree appellant prayed an appeal direct to this court.

¶4This court can take jurisdiction in this case only in the event a freehold is involved. A freehold may or may not be involved in a proceeding to sell real estate to pajr debts, and is only involved in such proceeding when some question is raised in regard to the title to the land. (Lynn v. Lynn, 160 Ill. 307; Fields v. Coker, 161 id. 186; Richie v. Cox, 188 id. 276.) The title to the land in this proceeding is in no manner put in issue. This court, therefore, has no jurisdiction of this appeal. It should have gone to the Appellate Court.

¶5The appeal must be dismissed.

¶6Appeal dismissed.

/215/ill/119 · .json · Public domain