Opinion

People ex rel. Brown v. Bauer

  • 247 Ill. App. 263
  • 1928 Ill. App. LEXIS 549
Court
Appellate Court of Illinois
Filed
Jan 20, 1928
Status
Published
Author
Barry
On the bench
Barry
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 17.8%

The opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Barry delivered the opinion of the court.

Appellant procured a temporary injunction. Appellees moved to dissolve the injunction and also demurred to the hill for want of eqúity. The demurrer was sustained and the motion to dissolve the injunction was allowed. There was no order of the court dismissing the bill for want of equity.

An interlocutory order dissolving a temporary injunction without an order dismissing the bill, is not appealable. Warner v. Wagner, 201 Ill. App. 260 . Where an appellant is willing to rest his case upon a motion to dissolve a temporary injunction, he must, when the order dissolving the injunction is made, move the court to dismiss the bill, thus obtaining a final order of dismissal from which an appeal or writ of error will lie, although neither would lie from a mere decision on demurrer or motion to dissolve. Springfield Gas & Electric Co. v. City of Springfield, 206 Ill. App. 575 . Where the only relief sought by the bill is an injunction, the complainant upon the dissolution of the injunction, which is in effect a final order denying all relief, may dismiss his own bill and take an appeal. Williams v. Chicago Exhibition Co., 188 Ill. 19 . The bill of complaint has never been dismissed and the ease is still pending in the trial court. No final appealable order having been entered, the appeal must be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.