Cermak v. Chicago Bonding & Surety Co., 210 Ill. App. 187 (1918)

April 3, 1918 · Illinois Appellate Court · Gen. No. 23,528

210 Ill. App. 187

Anton J. Cermak, Bailiff, for use of Mabel Bowman, Plaintiff in Error, v. Chicago Bonding & Surety Company and John B. Matheson, Defendants in Error.

Gen. No. 23,528.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hosea W. Wells, Judge, presiding.

Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1917.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed April 3, 1918.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Anton J. Cermak, bailiff of the Municipal Court of Chicago, for the use of Mabel Bowman, plaintiff, against Chicago Bonding & Surety Company and John B. Matheson, defendants, on a replevin bond. From a judgment ordering the return of possession of the replevined property to said Bowman and awarding defendants one cent damages, plaintiff brings error.

Albert J. W. Appell, for plaintiff in error.

Sabath, Stafford & Sabath, for defendants in error.

* See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mb. Presiding Justice Taylor

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Replevin, § 206*—when return of household goods of tenant not shown. In an action on a replevin bond, given to secure the return of household furniture seized under a writ of replevin by defendant landlord while in a flat rented by plaintiff of defendant, evidence held insufficient to show a return of the property.

2. Replevin, § 171 ^* —what does not constitute return of household goods of tenant. One who seizes household goods of his tenant under a writ of replevin, and, after an order for return of the goods to the tenant, tells her she can have them and that they are in the flat, and keeps the goods there until the expiration of the lease, when he takes them out and stores them, during all this time keeping the premises locked and paying the rent, does not make a return of the' goods.