, 1876-07-20
49,, 1nnoYtnNt Decision Relating
to the Inv OF pendtng
Suits.
1ba nulo in Relation to tho Require.
u,onts Of m. Affidavit Of Merits.
sfrs. K,nzio Declared to Dc Entitled to
Her hover Rights.
Decision Of Judge Williams In ths hath
Cows Hospital-Lot Case.
s,JTpIsESIII COURT.
ta rtVtYtyENa.

Gas brought In tic Circuit CnuTt ny Iicnucts
and others against Charles =. 0rant anu others
Il, set aside transfcr Of piece Of land IN llydo
PARK male by Mary 4. Nowcosnb to 0rant'
which was alleged to he cloud on complain.
.nts, title This lind wns several years ago cot'-
vrycl to Miss Newcofnb by Il Mr., Rockaiellow
Mt tho time he wis paying her attentions, ana |
M he c1nilns, under pronse Ut marriage, Tug
sunrcmc Court olt appeal fM former statt lla.!
deerrcd that she husl no tltleto the !nnd, n,ls!
suul rcconvcyit, Another hi' @ Mas Mn,xs thesa IeS
10 Qr4ut, an,l lii this suit dcerec WIS M1 1sti.
jcrcd agaioat Grant, aud an appeal taken; hms
oujy re,l question hi the case was as 10 HiLeLter
Tic fllng of the bill ono hour prior 10 tlc us,
livery of the decd to Grant was LIS tcngens 40
II 10 bind Grant rs purchaser anu a'1ecs Ills
Tic supremu Court held that until the scr
yc y n ta csse slowed ri a IT, ser
scs was not f,ad In thu suit Until Two of ta'oo &c
days after tie conveyance to drani, ho Mas ~
purchaser, was aso T. ~ ea IT. M states 1s
decisions IN Engana anu aa ~ IL T., f.'rcc Scrc
Uniform Is on tue subject Of lis pendens. that i
t1id not apply Until after service OF summons,
an TINT o recent status - t;! aH saa a.. t e
cisIp,i Of tile lClrcuit Court waB tncrcfoEo re-
yersed. Mr.. Il. r. vallctto appeared for tho MP
pcltunt. 1
Tn tho cnse Of N. 2. Wilder, appellant, rs.
Jolu II. Arwed.on, lately decided BY tho ~. ~.
nreine Court, qucstion was raised M 70 hno
fight Of Tho Court to strike plea from M ia % n1es
il1gncat t r as BY default. Suit WA brought on
eig eips 4. uuge, and by lin aiorscd 70 appellee.
Al aaayt q The appellants attorney os Eoa
wa duo on the loto.. "A plea of, general Issue
VA died, but NJ affidavit OF mcrits, aud on mo.
tiou tl,a plea was stricken from the dies, a1ld
Judgment rendered Tor Ss,hss ~ Am aPpcat Gat
tlle affidavit HE'D with the DECLARATION should
imye been made by tho plaintiff, aud that II 10
had failed IN filing an affidavit 81, 81 m merits, IT, the
Court shenla sla9 h9ge a,owea So,nst @ him IN ''S
The HupTencI Iourt held, III regard to the
first point, that the statute only required long,
alldayit Of tae amount tlue to be hlsa ana M s dla
md objection, It was decided tllat when the plea
WIS fllsd without all affidavit the plaintiff was
entitled to u tlefnult, aud Il was mt Improper
81 ths Court Aft ts aintm ~ osea n" a,sa ior 70
require tho defendant to Disclose BY affidavit the
nature oi his lefes,se, 20 tlut tho Court might
eee whether lie lad I. merit oriouH defense TO the
an1ep Nc i. ' ssc n,as Gy Ills flea M should have
shown IT, and II hc failed II wus by Ills own neg.
Ills plea was properly stricken from tile flcs,
mud Judgment gtsen' nnd IT would therefore pS
Messrs. Goaly, Chandler, Il Skinner for tho
THE H1nztg DOVER CLAIMS. .....
The Supreme Court las roeeltIy, IN the ct1aes
of Yalo RI. Kinzie uud Moore vs. Same, estnt-
1slled tle validity Of tho dover claims oi M1s;
Gwinthlcau II. klu4!o ia ths nScrcsiens caAt OF
saa strss forming Lot l3n 1, n'9sk r. 81 Of XII y,
Ktnzie VS.. Winaton mud lombard ". ktnzle 1t
hal already beun EH'l that Mrs. Kinzls lnel \
dover Interest Iii certain nccretos east Of santi
k~tA AtsfxItS MT &fNt
street Which had NIT been carried entirely away
by tho water, au rs to ubliterate all Ktnze's t.
tic. a new point WIS raised tn tho present
suits, IL being claimed that, Instead Of Tic little
iaDsdiHs ing t''s shofo sA l'ne tA t. wiich % the
iccrct,ons attached, the cncroaehmcnts ol
!he lako were 80 great ~ to make a3t 4 N p
tha IT, i kinss 10
Tho appelants alleged that the testimony show
vi tl.at tho trialgle above mentioned was Gu
t!rrly engulfel III the wnters OF tlse lake, AM
csno mart Of Tic bed OF tho lake Of which tn
Stato, In virtue Of It's sovereignty, becam'
TIe Supreme Court said they ala not undcr
stand that the triangle aboyu mentioned was a
any tmn separated from Block 81 by grmlua
and t1npcr.pptiblo eruslon, hut was engulict
temporarily by tho watcrs Of the lax
wsn was fy Ters s'fs vas s0'sn' ~ yetfsss assa Il tia
after tho subsllcncs eoi tho innacnr
producing the accretipu tho loss was made "
tfiosu srcsetiona tle shoTo linz of tl'u lake =
It Appaarel wuB many hundred lcot east Of th
original west line Of tae trlanglo. That all thu
large body Of land lnust BY deemed accrctot'
souahle aud JUST ard tlat land was the r
anglc oncc part Of Sand strcnt, aud nat III
/ interior piece known ~ Block s., Tho judf
,ncnt ~ 1svus at Mrs. kinzic was therefore .
1ENnf V,NN nrlS r. 5.At
LrrsLa LAW ON TIE SUBJECT OF AEcttANlc
In M c.,o Of oreensaf a1Ess: .t o, ,,,e,,snt y,
Becto, appel!ec, which was decided BY tic 81
premc Court last month, question Waa ralse
~ to the legality of decree for .nechancs' lie
againss husband and wife. Accbe flied pct
by Mrs. Eai,uLc E,.ircenlcai. une Of tho appe
lants. A demurrer was t|lpd On tile grou,
that It *as sought tn esaEgs Ars. 0rrculeat,
tract under seal. The demurrer was osorrulo
md, no RIlswer being nle0, lecree wna ren1e
cd against Mrs, Gruen!eaf and her hu1La,,
William l.. .0reenleai An appcal WIS tuke
Ny exttislsto evidence to bind Mrs. ureenlcaf
q aeoutraet uudur seal, and, second, that fat
crrur was mada in making 0Ecenleat party d
fonlant to The tlerree.
qucslion. .uf tho admission OF extrlns'c eyllen
to bind Mrs. Oreeniea& ta a eol'tract did n
arise, as tho petition WIS unly llca ~ recoi
for uxtra work lone after the execution Of
written contrart, aud tho question only was
70 whether sufficient sytdcnes hnd liacn
duced to bind her. 0reenicat, acting -
wle'a ugcnt, with her full knowledge, co'sc
aud approval, nlaia . verbal contract v
building erected oil lier land. Sic had |
power to bind herself Tor labor ind n,ateri
furusahed for hcr separate property, and, 4 I
could cnnlract III peraon, thu cnull
agent. II contract for the erection ul
builIing Was male by husba.l aud thu 80
wa erectcl on tho snal eatate belonging To
wife III her separate right with her full kno
odge appFpb4lon, sul cousent, and she ial
tollsctose her Interest nr pFuysat the work,
would bo estoppvl frou. setting up het rlg
ga dssorse Y t4e mechanics l!ell. Ths !
tldn alleged that Greuuleai ha1 sumo rlgA
t(lu premises, aud tlls was aduslttca BY thu
snufrer, ~ that lecsca WAS properly rcnde
against lIM. The decree, however, tOuul =
tain amount dus Dcebe, lcclased tho same Il
alien, and ordered tho amount due to be paid
tAo defendants Within certain time, or that
premises le sold. In 80 far u personxl
:ree was rendered againat William L. Orr