Appeal from the Circuit Court of Champaign County; the Hon.
ANDREW STECYK, Judge, presiding. Appeal dismissed.
Rehearing denied May 18, 1970.
Defendants appeal from a judgment for possession rendered for plaintiff by the Circuit Court in a forcible entry and detainer action.
The defendants in their brief present eleven issues to be reviewed upon appeal, the last of which was whether the Circuit Court erred in refusing to approve or disapprove the supersedeas bond filed by defendants. Apparently with some foundation the defendants complain that errors were made by the court in the entry of one order and that notice was not given of the decision of the court and the entry of another order. The pleadings are prolific. Defendants by this appeal seek to attack the errors and omissions of the court below as well as to question substantive points of law. The plaintiff objects to the appeal upon the grounds that it was not perfected within the time prescribed by law.
In the view we take of this appeal, a compendium of the pleadings will be unnecessary. It is sufficient for our purpose to note that the final judgment of the trial court was entered on February 6, 1969, and all issues before the trial court were disposed of at that time. Defendants were in court and had notice of the entry of the final order and at that same time filed, over plaintiff's objections as to timeliness, their notice of appeal. On the same day, defendants filed their motion to set appeal bond which motion was taken under advisement. On February 7, 1969, the court entered an order fixing the appeal bond in the amount of $3,500 with surety to be approved by the court. The defendants were notified of this order by letter of the Circuit Clerk to the attorney for defendants dated February 7, 1969. On February 17, 1969, the following letter, written upon the letterhead of a bank in Urbana, Illinois, was filed in the case:
"February 17, 1969 "Our 101st Year
"Honorable Judge Stecyk "Court House "Urbana, Illinois 61801
"This letter is to confirm that I have in liquid assets $3,500.00 of John H. Fung which is now in a `hold' situation and will be only released by me only upon receipt of written communication from you.
"It is my understanding that this asset is to be used as a Surety Bond until a final decision has been made by you.
"Respectfully yours, (Signature) "Assistant Vice President
Plaintiff's motion for writ of restitution was filed and allowed on February 18, 1969. Defendants' motion for approval of appeal bond was filed and denied on February ...