Baldwin v. Schwall, 106 Ill. App. 16 (1903)

Feb. 9, 1903 · Illinois Appellate Court
106 Ill. App. 16
Matthew S. Baldwin et al. v. Lydia J. Schwall, Ex'x

Matthew S. Baldwin et al. v. Lydia J. Schwall, Ex’x.

1. Appellate Court Practice—Where No Errors Are Assigned.— An assignment of errors is not a mere matter of form, but is one of substance and is essential. Where no errors are assigned, the decree below must be affirmed or the appeal dismissed.

Bill for the Foreclosure of a Mortgage.—-Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Philip Stein, Judge presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1902.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed February 9, 1903.

This is a bill for the foreclosure of a mortgage. The decree finds that complainant (here appellee) is the holder and.owner of the mortgage indebtedness; that the mortgage is a valid and subsisting lien upon the premises described therein, and that appellant Belle G. Baldwin is personally liable to the complainant for the amount due upon the unpaid note secured by said mortgage. It then finds the amount due to-the complainant and directs that if such amount be not paid within a fixed time, a sale of the premises be made by the master. From such decree this appeal was taken.

George S. Baker, attorney for appellants.

Ela, Grover & Graves, attorneys for appellee.

Mr. Presiding Justice Ball

delivered the opinion of the court.

We have carefully examined the original and the supplemental records in this case, and find that appellants have assigned no errors in this court. There is therefore noth*17ing before us for consideration. An assignment of errors is not a mere matter o.f form, but is one of substance and is essential. Ætna L. I. Co. v. Sanford, 197 Ill. 310; Cessna v. Benedict, 98 Ill. App. 440. This defect necessitates.an affirmance of the decree below, or a dismissal of the appeal. Kniel v. Spring V. C. Co., 96 Ill. App. 411.

Notwithstanding the lack of an assignment of errors, we have looked into the merits of this case, and are of the opinion that, even if errors had been assigned, we could not support the contentions of appellants.

For those reasons the decree of the Superior Court is affirmed.