From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Holmes v. Burk

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District
Sep 6, 1934
277 Ill. App. 46 (Ill. App. Ct. 1934)

Opinion

Opinion filed September 6, 1934.

1. APPEAL AND ERROR — necessity that record comply with rules of court. Rules of court relating to the record on appeal must be complied with.

2. APPEAL AND ERROR — when appeal dismissed because of defective record. Where, although dismissal of an appeal, in accordance with appellee's motion, for appellant's failure to file a record would have been warranted, the filing time was extended by more than a month and, on next to the last day of this extended period, appellant filed a purported record but the latter in no sense complied with the statute and the Appellate Court's rules, held that the appeal would be dismissed.

Appeal by plaintiff from the Circuit Court of Effingham county; the Hon. WILLIAM B. WRIGHT, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the February term, 1934. Appeal dismissed. Opinion filed September 6, 1934.

M. C. McCALLEN and W. S. HOLMES, for appellant.

HAROLD J. TAYLOR, for appellee.


At the June Term 1933 of the circuit court of Effingham county — July 26, 1933, a decree was rendered in favor of appellant W. S. Holmes against Alice Burk for foreclosure of a mortgage on real estate. By the same decree the court found that appellee W. A. Arnold had a prior lien to appellant on the premises. Appellant undertook to appeal from this decree. He was given time to file an appeal bond and time to file a certificate of evidence. These instruments were filed within the respective times prescribed. The certificate of evidence was approved by the trial court on October 21, 1933. The term of this court to which this record should have been filed opened February 27, 1934. The record should have been filed by February 6th unless the time was extended. This gave appellant from October 21st until February 6th in which to file his appeal here in compliance with rules. Thus 108 days intervened but no record was filed. This court would have been fully warranted in dismissing the appeal in pursuance of appellee's motion therefor filed on February 5th. Instead we extended the time for appellant to file until March 20th. On March 19th appellant filed a supposed record which in no sense complies with the statute and the rules of this court.

The courts have gone to great pains to simplify their rules under the statute for the use and benefit of litigants. It is imperative that they be followed. Gibson v. Vail, 248 Ill. 432. Appellant has had more consideration from this court than the rules call for. The appeal is dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.


Summaries of

Holmes v. Burk

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District
Sep 6, 1934
277 Ill. App. 46 (Ill. App. Ct. 1934)
Case details for

Holmes v. Burk

Case Details

Full title:W. S. Holmes, Appellant, v. Alice Burk and W. A. Arnold, Appellee

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District

Date published: Sep 6, 1934

Citations

277 Ill. App. 46 (Ill. App. Ct. 1934)

Citing Cases

Cassens v. Paynter

If it be taken in the light most favorable to the appellants, that is, that the true date upon which the…