Bell Federal Savings And Loan Association v. Hubert F. Horton

Join Now
Category:
Law
Words | Pages:
417 | 2
Views:
84
Bookmark and Share

Bell Federal Savings And Loan Association v. Hubert F. Horton

376 N.E.2d 1029
Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District.
BELL FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, an association, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Hubert F. HORTON and Tangee S. Horton, Defendants-Appellants.
No. 77-439.
May 9, 1978.

Issue:   Was the Plaintiff justified in resorting to service by publication and mailing?
Rule:   Plaintiff-Appellee sought to foreclose a mortgage lien on certain real property owned by the Defendants-Appellants, Hubert F. Horton and Tangee S. Horton. The suit proceeded to a Decree obtained by default since no pleading was filed by the Defendants until after the Decree for and sale of the foreclosed premises. The suit proceeded normally to a Sheriff's sale at which Plaintiff was the purchaser and to a deficiency judgment of $102.62 against the Defendants. There is some question concerning the latter item, but the same does appear in the record as a valid judgment against the Defendants.
Bell Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Horton, 59 Ill. App. 3d 923, 924, 376 N.E.2d 1029, 1031 (1978)

Application: “Due inquiry” and “diligent inquiry” are words of established legal significance. These two phrases have a well understood meaning that cannot be reconciled with the taking of a chance or guessing. (Graham v. O'Connor, 350 Ill. 36, 41, 182 N.E. 764.) In order to justify the use of service by publication upon opposing parties it is requisite that something more be done than was shown by this record to have been done. Despite the burden which rested upon the Plaintiff to sustain the proof of due inquiry and due diligence there is nothing shown to have been done by Plaintiff to locate the Defendants among the neighbors or to ascertain the place of employment of either of the Defendants.
Bell Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Horton, 59 Ill. App. 3d 923, 927, 376 N.E.2d 1029, 1033 (1978)

Conclusion: We conclude this opinion by stating that: The attempted service in this case was incapable of vesting jurisdiction over Defendants as to the...

Join Now