Case Name: Thomas Carbine v. Osmond Fox
Court: Illinois Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1881-03-16
Citations: 98 Ill. 146
Docket Number: 
Parties: Thomas Carbine v. Osmond Fox.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Reports
Volume: 98
Pages: 146–147

Head Matter:
Thomas Carbine v. Osmond Fox.
Filed at Ottawa March 16, 1881.
Appbaíé from or error to Appellate Court—sale under power in mortgage— whether a freehold involved. Where the Appellate Court affirms a decree of the circuit court enjoining the sale of land under a power in a mortgage, on the ground of payment, and the amount in controversy is under $1000, a writ of error will not lie from this court to the Appellate Court. In such case there is no right of freehold involved.
"Writ oe Error to the Appellate Court for the First District ;—heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. W. W. Farwell, Judge, presiding.
Mr. William H. Sissen, and Mr. Wesley Sissen, for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. R. W. Smith, for the defendant in error.

Opinion:
Per Curiam :
Carbine, holding a mortgage on two certain lots of land to secure the payment of a promissory note made on October 27, 1868, for $323, payable in one year .from date, with ten per cent interest, and, having advertised the lots for sale under a power of sale contained in the mortgage, Fox, the owner of the equity of redemption, filed his bill in chancery, setting up that the note had been fully paid and satisfied, and praying for an injunction against the sale of the property or foreclosure of the mortgage, and that the lots be declared free from the lien of the mortgage. The circuit court decreed the relief sought. On appeal to the Appellate Court for the First District, the decree was affirmed, and the case is brought here on error to the Appellate Court. The writ of error must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, the amount in controversy being less than $1000. It is urged that the writ maybe maintained on the ground of there being a freehold involved. As we have held that in a suit for the foreclosure of a mortgage on real property a freehold is not involved, it must, for the same reason, be held that a freehold is not involved in the present proceeding.
Writ of error dismissed.