Categories: Illinois Appellate Court Opinions

PIECZYNSKI v. PIECZYNSKI, 323 Ill. App. 649 (1944)

56 N.E.2d 491

William J. Pieczynski, Appellant, v. Stanley Pieczynski, Individually and as Executor of Estate of Pelagia Pieczynski, Deceased, et al., Appellees.1

Gen. No. 42,969. (Abstract of Decision.)Appellate Court of Illinois, Chicago, First District.
Opinion filed September 11, 1944

DISCONTINUANCE, DISMISSAL AND NONSUIT, § 56[*] — vacating of dismissal order more thaw 30 days after entry thereof. For purpose of plaintiff’s petition for vacation of order, entered on court’s motion, whereby accounting complaint, subject-matter of which was within court’s jurisdiction, was dismissed for want of prosecution, defendants conferred jurisdiction of their persons on court, and were estopped to deny want of jurisdiction in court to vacate order because of expiration of more than 30 days after its entry, by participating in hearings before master and other proceedings in cause after its dismissal.

[*] See Callaghan’s Illinois Digest, same topic and sectionnumber.

Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. JOHN J. LUPE, Judge, presiding.

Reversed and remanded with directions. Heard

Page 650

in the first division, first district, this court at the February term, 1944. Opinion filed September 11, 1944.

Cloyes Cavender, of Chicago, for appellant;

Joseph F. Elward, of Chicago, for appellees.

Opinion by PRESIDING JUSTICE NIEMEYER.

Not to be published ill full. Opinion filed September 11, 1944.

jdjungle