Case Name: Harlan Watson, Appellee, v. W. B. Lozier, Appellant
Court: Illinois Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1917-02-10
Citations: 204 Ill. App. 157
Docket Number: Gen. No. 6,388
Parties: Harlan Watson, Appellee, v. W. B. Lozier, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Appellate Court Reports
Volume: 204
Pages: 157–158

Head Matter:
Harlan Watson, Appellee, v. W. B. Lozier, Appellant.
Gen. No. 6,388.
(Not to be reported in full.)
Abstract of the Decision.
1. Appeal and error, § 800 —what Mil of exceptions must contain for purpose of review. A contention on appeal that the trial court erred in overruling a motion for a continuance certified to by the clerk of court, but not shown, nor any proof in support thereof or denial of such motion, in the bill of exceptions, is not presented for review by the Appellate Court.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Warren county; the Hon. Robert J. Grier, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.
Affirmed.
Opinion filed February 10, 1917.
Statement of the Case.
Action of forcible detainer by Harlan Watson, plaintiff, against W. B. Lozier, defendant, to recover possession of one hundred acres of land. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
The defendant by lease dated October 20, 1914, leased the premises involved for the year from March 1, 1915 to March 1, 1916. The plaintiff by lease dated October 20,1915, leased the premises for the year from March 1,1916 to March 1,1917. The defendant did not surrender possession March 1, 1916, and the plaintiff after serving him with written demand for possession brought this action.
Hanley & Cox and Safford & Graham, for appellant.
Brown & Soule, for appellee.
See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, game topic and section number.
See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Dibell
delivered the opinion of the court.
2. Forcible entry and detainer, § 79 —when lease to subsequent lessee is admissible in action by such lessee. Under clause 4 of section 2 of the Forcible Entry and Detainer Act (J. & A. If 5843), providing that the person entitled to the possession of lands may be restored thereto by suit under the act, where any lessee holds possession without right after determination of the lease by its own terms, the lessee of a subsequent lease of the lands is entitled to offer his lease in evidence to show his right of possession, in an action under such act.
3. Forcible entry and detainer, § 47*—when lessee of subsequent lease is a grantee. The lessee of a subsequent lease suing for possession of the lands, the lessee of a prior lease holding over after the expiration of the term according to his lease, is a grantee within the meaning of section 14 of the Landlord and Tenant Act (J. & A. 7052), providing that the assignee of the lessor shall have the same remedy for nonperformance of any agreement in the lease as his grantor or lessor might have had.