Case Name: John Coutre, Appellee, vs. Ernest Ermel et al. Appellants
Court: Illinois Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1925-02-17
Citations: 315 Ill. 361
Docket Number: No. 16325
Parties: John Coutre, Appellee, vs. Ernest Ermel et al. Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Reports
Volume: 315
Pages: 361–362

Head Matter:
(No. 16325.
Cause transferred.)
John Coutre, Appellee, vs. Ernest Ermel et al. Appellants.
Opinion filed February 17, 1925.
Freehold — creditor’s bill to set aside a fraudulent conveyance and make land subject to judgment does not involve freehold. A bill filed by a judgment creditor to set aside a fraudulent conveyance made by the debtor and to subject the conveyed land to the payment of the judgment does not involve a freehold, and an appeal from the decree setting aside the deed should go to the Appellate Court.
Appear from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Charles M. Foell, Judge, presiding.
Julius Limbach, and Edward McTiernan, for appellants.
Barney L. Hollowicic, for appellee.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Thompson
delivered the opinion of the court:
John Coutre, appellee, recovered a judgment in the municipal court of Chicago for $2000 against Ernest Ermel, one of the appellants. Thereafter Coutre filed in the superior court of Cook county a bill for the purpose of subjecting to the payment of the judgment certain land that Ermel and his wife had conveyed to appellant John Fred Lange. A decree was rendered finding the deeds in question to be fraudulent and setting them aside as between the parties and decreeing a sale of the land to satisfy the judgment. From that decree an appeal has been prosecuted to this court.
There is no question in this case which gives this court jurisdiction. It has been repeatedly held that a bill filed by a judgment creditor to set aside a fraudulent conveyance made by the debtor and to subject the conveyed land to the payment of the judgment does not involve a freehold. (Fairbanks v. Carle, 217 Ill. 136; First Nat. Bank v. Vest, 187 id. 389; Hupp v. Hupp, 153 id. 490.) The questions raised by the assignment of errors are questions proper to be reviewed by the Appellate Court.
The cause is transferred to the Appellate Court for the First District.
, Cause transferred.