DocketNumber: No. 28304. Cause transferred.
Citation Numbers: 60 N.E.2d 104, 389 Ill. 588, 1945 Ill. LEXIS 511
Judges: Wilson
Filed Date: 3/21/1945
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/8/2024
The plaintiff, Everett Simpson, filed an amended complaint in the circuit court of Cook county against the defendant, Hazel Harrison, seeking specific performance of an oral agreement to convey to him an undivided one-half interest in an improved parcel of real estate in Chicago, and for other relief. Defendant answered, denying the material allegations of the complaint. Upon defendant's motion, the cause was referred to a special commissioner for the purpose of taking proofs and making findings of fact and recommendations of law. Plaintiff's motion to vacate the order of reference was denied. Plaintiff did not attend the hearing conducted by the commissioner and, according to the commissioner's report, refused to appear to give evidence. Defendant, a nonresident, appeared and evidence was adduced in her behalf. By his report, the commissioner recommended that plaintiff's complaint be dismissed, with prejudice. Objections interposed to the report, challenging the power or authority of the special commissioner to act in the cause or to render a report, were ordered to stand as exceptions. The chancellor approved the report of the commissioner, adjudged that plaintiff's complaint be dismissed, with prejudice, for want of prosecution, and assessed the costs of the proceedings against him. Jurisdiction to fix the fees of the special commissioner and tax them as costs was reserved. Thereafter, the commissioner's fees were approved. Plaintiff prosecutes *Page 590 a direct appeal, apparently on the assumption that a freehold or the validity of a statute or a construction of the constitution is involved, within the contemplation of section 75 of the Civil Practice Act. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1943, chap. 110, par. 199.
An action for specific performance of a contract to convey real estate involves a freehold. (Espadron v. Davis,
Neither the validity of a statute nor a construction of the constitution was involved in the issues presented for decision in the circuit court. Plaintiff has never contended that any statutory provision violates either the Federal or State constitution in any respect. His contention that statutory authority for the order of reference to a special commissioner was wanting does not present for decision the validity of a statute or the construction of the constitution. (Gordon v.Bauer,
The cause is transferred to the Appellate Court for the First District.
Cause transferred.
Jones v. Dove , 382 Ill. 445 ( 1943 )
Frey v. Schaab , 379 Ill. 315 ( 1942 )
Gordon v. Bauer , 373 Ill. 357 ( 1940 )
Faulkner v. Black , 378 Ill. 112 ( 1941 )
Hooper v. Wabash Automotive Corp. , 365 Ill. 30 ( 1936 )
Fyffe v. Fyffe , 364 Ill. 281 ( 1936 )
McBeath v. McBeath , 334 Ill. 40 ( 1929 )
Lewis v. West Side Trust & Savings Bank , 373 Ill. 245 ( 1940 )
Schrader v. Schrader , 357 Ill. 623 ( 1934 )
Herrick v. Lain , 375 Ill. 569 ( 1941 )
The People v. Prpich , 368 Ill. 169 ( 1938 )
Espadron v. Davis , 385 Ill. 304 ( 1944 )
Wainwright v. McDonough , 364 Ill. 626 ( 1936 )
Browning v. Browning , 379 Ill. 29 ( 1942 )
McGrath v. Dunne , 363 Ill. 549 ( 1936 )