HENRY M. KELLOGG AND OTHERS
v.
ROBERT FORSYTH
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A landlord who defended an ejectment suit in his tenant's name with the tenant's consent and subsequently pursued a writ of error on behalf of the tenant's heirs after the tenant's death was permitted to continue the appeal, despite one heir's objection, because the landlord had a bona fide interest in the land and undertook responsibility for all costs. The Court held that a landlord who has undertaken the defense of a suit in a tenant's name with consent cannot be prevented from pursuing that defense by subsequent objections from the tenant's heirs, and may prosecute the writ of error upon his agreement to bear all expenses.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice CAMPBELL delivered the opinion of the court.
The defendant in error recovered a judgment in ejectment in the Circuit Court of the United States for the northern district, of Illinois against-William Kellogg, deceased, as tenant in possession of a parcel of land in that district. After the judgment, the defendant died. The attorney of the decedent, who was also his landlói’d, and who had conducted the suit on behalf and in the name of-the tenant, with his consent, sued out a writ of error to this court in the name of the heirs of said Kellogg. .The bond.for the prosecution of^the writ, and the stipulation for costs in this court, have been supplied by the said attorney. One of the heirs of Kellogg .objects to the prosecution of the writ of error, and alleges, on behalf of himself and his coheirs, that it is'prosecuted without authority, and that they have no desire that it should be maintained, and authorize the attorney of the defendant in error to move for its dismissal.' It appears to the court that the attorney of the deceased defendant is a bona fide claimant of the land, and that he is prosecuting the writ_of error in good faith. That he is responsible for the costs and damages that may arise from thé use of the names of the plaintiffs in error. The statutes of Illinois require that the declaration in ejectment shall be served upon the actual occupant, and the practice of -the courts of that State authorizes the appearance of the landlord,- and his defence of the suit, either in his own name or that of the tenant, with his consent. Williams v. Brunton, 3 Gilman R., 600.
And when a landlord has undertaken the defence of a suit in the name of the tenant, with his consent, the tenant cannot interfere with the cause to his prejudice. Doe v. Franklin, 7 Taun., 9. We think it was competent to the landlord to use the names of the plaintiffs to prosecute his writ of error upor his engagement to bear all the costs and expenses of the suit. Should the judgment be reversed, and the cause remanded to, the Circuit Court for further proceedings, he may apply in thai court for leave to become defendant, instead of the heirs of the tenant.
Motion to dismiss overruled.