Case Name: Turner Taylor, Appellant, v. Carrie Taylor, Appellee
Court: Illinois Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1911-05-26
Citations: 162 Ill. App. 101
Docket Number: 
Parties: Turner Taylor, Appellant, v. Carrie Taylor, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Appellate Court Reports
Volume: 162
Pages: 101–102

Head Matter:
Turner Taylor, Appellant, v. Carrie Taylor, Appellee.
Appeals and errors—when interlocutory order will not he reviewed. In an appeal from an order granting solicitor’s fees to the complainant in a divorce proceeding an order overruling exceptions to an answer, being interlocutory merely, cannot be reviewed.
Divorce. Appeal from the Circuit Court of McLean county; the Hon. C. D. Myers, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1910.
Affirmed.
Opinion filed May 26, 1911.
Rehearing denied June 16, 1911.
Jesse E. Hoffman, De Mange, Gillespie & De Mange and Welty, Sterling & Whitmore, for appellant.
Owen & Owen and Barry & Morrissey, for appellee.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Baume
delivered the opinion of the court.
On January 20, 1910, appellant filed his bill in equity against appellee for divorce upon the ground of desertion, Appellee answered the bill denying its material allegations and also filed certain affidavits in support of her motion for an order on appellant to pay her such amount as should be necessary to enable her to defend the suit and for solicitors' fees and costs and expenses. Appellant filed his exceptions to appellee's answer which exceptions were overruled by the chancellor and an order entered requiring appellant to pay to appellee $100 for her reasonable and necessary solicitor's fees. This appeal is prosecuted to reverse such order.
Appellant argues at length against the propriety of the decree overruling his exceptions to appellee's answer, but such decree was interlocutory only and no appeal lies therefrom. The answer of appellee as it now stands presents a complete defense to the cause of action alleged in appellant's bill, and as it is not urged that the order for the payment of solicitor's fees is not justified, save for the reason that, the exceptions to the answer should have been sustained, it necessarily follows that such order should be affirmed. Accordingly the order is affirmed.
Affirmed.