Stead v. Craine

3 Citing cases

  1. Sears Bank Trust Co. v. Scott

    331 N.E.2d 607 (Ill. App. Ct. 1975)   Cited 5 times

    In that event, the court would have no personal jurisdiction, and any judgment entered would be void. Here, however, there was a sum certain established at the creation of the instrument, and the warrant authorized entry of defendant's appearance and judgment against him for that amount or any lesser amount which a court may find due. As stated in Stead v. Craine, 256 Ill. App. 445, 449: "If the court erred in fixing the amount of the judgment, such error would not affect the jurisdiction of the court * * *."

  2. Pirie v. Carroll

    171 N.E.2d 99 (Ill. App. Ct. 1961)   Cited 6 times

    In the second supplemental affidavit filed by the defendant on May 6, 1959 it is made clear that the defendant is claiming for damages allegedly caused by the breach of the warranty. Prior to the adoption of the Civil Practice Act in 1933 it was held that a judgment by confession would not be opened to permit the defendant to file a setoff, counterclaim or cross-action. Stead v. Craine, 256 Ill. App. 445; Smysor v. Glasscock, 256 Ill. App. 29. In Busse v. Muller, 295 Ill. App. 101, 14 N.E.2d 669, the court said:

  3. Vella v. Pour

    68 N.E.2d 631 (Ill. App. Ct. 1946)   Cited 8 times

    Lane v. Allen, 162 Ill. 426; Wolf v. Lawrence, 276 Ill. 11; Illinois Refining Co. v. Welch, 341 Ill. 292. In the case of Stead v. Craine, 256 Ill. App. 445, it was held that affidavits to vacate a judgment entered by confession under a power of attorney in a lease, which purported to set forth agreements not contained in the lease, were insufficient, since they were merely an attempt to vary the terms of a written agreement by parol evidence. It is claimed on behalf of defendants that there was a failure of consideration.