Case ID: ill-app_186/html/0088-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Fitch", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Hattie J. Brown, Appellant, v. Edward M. Brown, Appellee.
    Gen. No. 19,895.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding.
    Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1913.
    Transferred to Supreme Court.
    Opinion filed April 23, 1914.
    Statement of the Case.
    Bill by Hattie J. Brown against Edward M. Brown praying for a divorce on the grounds of cruelty and adultery. The bill alleged that after the marriage complainant bought real estate with her own money, that the defendant without complainant’s knowledge and consent procured the insertion of his name as a grantee jointly with complainant, and that defendant thereafter refused to release to her his interest thus acquired. The bill prayed for a decree requiring defendant to execute such release and convey to complainant all his interest in the real estate. The court dismissed the bill for want of equity, and complainant appeals.
    The appellant assigned as errors the action of the court in refusing a decree of divorce and also in refusing to require appellee to release and convey to complainant his interest in said real estate.
    Chytraus, Healy & Frost and Edwin White Moore, for appellant.
    Bluim & Teed, for appellee.
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Appeal and error, § 147
      
      —when decree in divorce proceeding involves a freehold. A decree dismissing a bill for divorce held to involve a freehold authorizing a transfer of an appeal perfected in the Appellate Court to the Supreme Court, where the pleadings presented two distinct issues, one whether complainant was entitled to a divorce and the other whether she was entitled to a decree for a conveyance of real estate.
    2. Appeal and error, § 1718
      
      —when freehold not waived by appeal to Appellate Court.' Praying and perfecting an appeal to the Appellate Court and assigning errors which such court has jurisdiction to determine, held not to constitute a waiver or abandonment of the question whether a freehold is involved, where the appellant made his motion for a transfer of the appeal to the Supreme Court before any briefs or abstracts were filed in the Appellate Court.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Presiding Justice Fitch

delivered the opinion of the court.