Case ID: ill_323/html/0579-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Thompson", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(No. 17887.
    Cause transferred.)
    Arthur R. Clark, Appellant, vs. The G. A. Ball-Bearing Manufacturing Company et al. Appellees.
    
      Opinion filed December 23, 1926.
    
    
      Freehold — a freehold is not involved in a suit by creditor to set aside fraudulent conveyance. A bill filed by a creditor to set aside an alleged fraudulent conveyance made by the debtor and to subject the conveyed land to the payment of the obligation of the debtor does not involve a freehold, and the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction of a direct appeal from a decree dismissing such bill for want of equity.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Francis S. Wilson, Judge, presiding.
    Alexander H. Marshall, (Frank G. Marshall, of counsel,) for appellant.
    Alden, Latham & Young, (K. V. MacFarland, of counsel,) for appellees.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court:

This appeal is from a decree of the circuit court of Cook county dismissing for want of equity a bill filed by a creditor to set aside an alleged fraudulent conveyance made by the debtor and to subject the conveyed land to the payment of the obligation of the debtor. Appellant does not suggest a ground for jurisdiction in this court to entertain this appeal and we are unable to discover any. Such a suit does not involve a freehold. (Coutre v. Ermel, 315 Ill. 361.) The questions raised by the assignment of errors are proper questions to be reviewed by the Appellate Court for the First District, and the cause is accordingly transferred to that court.

, Cause transferred.