Moshier v. Reynolds, 155 Ill. 72 (1895)

Jan. 15, 1895 · Illinois Supreme Court

155 Ill. 72

George Moshier v. Leander B. Reynolds et al.

Filed at Ottawa January 15, 1895.

Appeals and errors—decree on Mil in aid of execution does not involve freehold. The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal direct from the circuit court from a decree rendered on a bill in aid of an execution and to set aside a deed as fraudulent, as the action does not involve a freehold.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Knox county; the Hon. Jefferson Orr, Judge, presiding.

At the October term, 1891, of the circuit court of Knox county, appellant recovered a judgment against Leander B. Reynolds for the sum of §6149.44, with costs of suit, and sued out an execution, which was placed in the hands of the sheriff, who levied the same on the south-west quarter of section 13, in Galesburg township, Knox county, Illinois, on the 12th day of December, 1891. On the 22d day of July, 1892, appellant filed in the circuit court of Knox county a bill in aid of execution and for discovery, and seeking to set aside a deed made in 1878 by said Reynolds, by which he conveyed the lands so levied on by the sheriff to one Elizabeth Benton, who, with others, is made party defendant to this bill. The bill seeks to have said deed set aside and the land subjected to sale on his execution, and for discovery and relief. On hearing, a decree was entered dismissing the bill, and the complainant brings the case by appeal to this court and asks a reversal of the decree of the circuit court.

Forrest F. Cooke, for appellant.

E. P. Williams, and George W. Thompson, for appellee Mrs. E. B. Benton.

Mr. Justice Phillips

delivered the opinion of the court:

A bill filed in aid of an execution, or as a creditor’s bill, seeking to set aside an alleged fraudulent conveyance made by a judgment debtor and subject the lands to sale for the payment of the judgment indebtedness, does not involve a freehold. (Blackman v. Preston Bros. 119 Ill. 240, and authorities cited; Hupp v. Hupp, 153 id. 490, and authorities cited.) No jurisdiction exists in this court to entertain an appeal direct from the circuit court in such case. Leave will be given to withdraw record, abstracts and briefs, and this appeal is ordered dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.