Case Name: Finley Barrell, Appellant, v. Lake Forest Water Company, Appellee
Court: Illinois Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1917-08-07
Citations: 208 Ill. App. 484
Docket Number: Gen. No. 6,399
Parties: Finley Barrell, Appellant, v. Lake Forest Water Company, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Appellate Court Reports
Volume: 208
Pages: 484–485

Head Matter:
Finley Barrell, Appellant, v. Lake Forest Water Company, Appellee.
Gen. No. 6,399.
(Not to be reported in full.)
Abstract of the Decision.
1. Waters and watercourses—when not shown that water meter is defective. Evidence held sufficient to warrant the finding that allegations of a hill that defendant’s meter was a “fast meter” and registered more water than was used hy complainant were not proved, in a suit by a water user against a water company to enjoin-it from shutting off water from complainant’s premises.
2. Appeal and error, § 1394 —when decree of chancellor not disturbed. Where the proof warrants the conclusion reached hy the chancellor on the facts, the decree based thereon should not be-disturbed.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Lake county; the Hon. Claire C. Edwards, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1917.
Affirmed.
Opinion filed August 7, 1917.
Statement of the Case.
Bill by Finley Barrell, complainant, against Lake Forest Water Company, defendant, for injunction to restrain defendant from shutting off water from complainant’s premises for his refusal to pay defendant’s bill demanded for water theretofore furnished complainant by defendant during the months of July, August and September, 1913. From a decree dismissing the bill for want of equity, complainant appeals.
Frederick Sass and A. F. Beaubien, for appellant.
Cooke, Pope & Pope, for appellee.
See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Niehaus
delivered the opinion of the court.
3. Pleading, § 453 —when replication is waived. When a case proceeds to trial upon the pleadings and proofs without a replication being filed, replication is waived and a sworn answer has no probative force.