The motion must prevail. There is now no judgment to be affirmed or reversed. The various rulings of the Circuit Court have in effect been set aside. The cause is now pending for trial de novo in that court. If the judgment had been affirmed on the appeal, the plaintiff in error might still prosecute his writ of error, and have his exceptions considered. But the exceptions fell with the judgment. The writ of error will be dismissed.
Rankin v. Ballance, 13 Ill. 706 (1852)
June 1852
·
Illinois Supreme Court
13 Ill. 706
John Rankin, Plaintiff in Error, v. Charles Ballance, Defendant in Error.
ERROR TO PEORIA.
Where a judgment has keen reversed on appeal and stands for hearing de novo in the Circuit Court, a writ of error will not lie to hear exceptions to the same judgment.
Ranicin recovered a judgment against Ballance, at the May term, 1851, of the Peoria Circuit Court. Ballance prosecuted an appeal to the succeeding June term of this court, during which the judgment was reversed and the cause remanded. *707Prior to the hearing of the case on the appeal, Rankin sued out a writ of error to the Circuit Court, returnable to the present term, of this court. Ballance now enters a motion to dismiss the writ of error.
Ballance, pro se, for the motion.
N. H. Purple, contra.