History
  • No items yet
midpage
Beadle v. Cole
173 Ill. 136
Ill.
1898
Check Treatment
Per Curiam :

This is an appeal by plaintiff.below from a judgment for defendants below in an action of ejectment. The suit involves the same title which was adjudicated upon and settled by this court in Whitehead v. Hall, 148 Ill. 253. That suit was brought for one part of a tract of 255 acres, and this suit is for another. The appellant here occupies no better position than the appellant occupied in that case. He assails the same title, founded on the same redemption sale, which in the case cited was held good. We have carefully examined and considered the elaborate arguments made by appellant for a reconsideration of the questions involved, but are unable to see that any error was committed in the decision mentioned. The fact urged upon our attention that the redemption creditor was a defendant to the first foreclosure suit did not deprive him of the right to redeem under his own decree rendered in the second foreclosure suit. (Boynton v. Pierce, 151 Ill. 197.) We see no reason for overruling the former case, but are satisfied it was correctly decided.

The judgment of the circuit court will be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Beadle v. Cole
Court Name: Illinois Supreme Court
Date Published: Apr 21, 1898
Citation: 173 Ill. 136
Court Abbreviation: Ill.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.