People ex rel. Thompson v. Noonan
The People ex rel. John R. Thompson, County Treasurer v. Edward T. Noonan
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Mr. Justice Dunn delivered the opinion of the court:
From a judgment of sale against certain lots of appellant for a delinquent special assessment he has appealed.
A judgment confirming the assessment was entered on March 17, 1896. On March 13, 1897, an order was entered vacating this judgment and a new judgment of confirmation was rendered. An order was entered October io, 1900, vacating the latter judgment, canceling and recalling the warrant certified for its collection, and another judgment of confirmation was entered. The judgment appealed from is based upon the judgment of confirmation of March 13, 1897. The parties agree that the judgment of October 10, 1900, was void.. The judgment of March 13, 1897, was also void.. It was rendered after the expiration of the term at which the judgment óf confirmation it purported to vacate was entered. It purported to be entered in pursuance of the stipulation made in open court at the time the original judgment of confirmation was entered. It was decided in the case of Noonan v. Thompson, 231 Ill. 588 , that “as soon as the term at which a judgment of confirmation was entered has expired the court loses jurisdiction of the subject matter, and the parties cannot, by their agreement entered into before the judgment was rendered, confer jurisdiction upon the county court over such subject matter and thereby authorize the county court to set aside the judgment of confirmation.” Where the parties interested voluntarily enter their appearance at a subsequent term and consent and agree to the vacation of a judgment, the court may thus be invested with jurisdiction to make such order, except as provided in section 56 of the Local Improvement act. (Hewetson v. City of Chicago; 172 Ill. 112 ; Sheridan v. City of Chicago, 175 id. 421.) But this rule has no application to an agreement made before the original judgment was entered.
The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded, with directions to sustain appellant’s objection that there is no valid judgment of confirmation.
Reversed and remanded, with directions.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.