Appellate Court for the Fifth District of Illinois
380 N.E.2d 7 (1978)
In February 1976, Janice Altom (plaintiff) entered into a separation agreement with her husband, Melvin Altom, pursuant to which Janice was to have exclusive possession of the marital residence and furniture, except for any items that the parties might agree would belong to Melvin. On March 7, 1976, Melvin invited Tracy Hawes (defendant) to the marital residence to view and purchase furniture. Hawes selected several items, paid $1,500 for the items, and took the items with him that same day for use by himself and his wife, Shirley Hawes (defendant). Melvin provided Hawes with a bill of sale. On March 18, 1976, Janice filed suit for divorce. After a default hearing, a decree was entered on May 6, 1976, holding that Melvin had appropriated and sold Janice’s property in violation of the separation agreement. Judgment was entered against Melvin in the amount of $1,500. One month after the decree, Janice had not yet collected on the money judgment. Instead, Janice filed a complaint in replevin against the Haweses. The trial court granted summary judgment for the Haweses. On Janice’s appeal, the Haweses argued that summary judgment was proper because Janice had elected her remedy in pursuing her claim against Melvin as a money judgment and was therefore seeking a double recovery by filing a replevin action. Janice argued that (1) the doctrine of election of remedies only applies where the two remedies sought are inconsistent, which hers were not; and (2) the judgment against Melvin was unsatisfied and therefore could not act as a bar to a subsequent suit.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Jones, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 218,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.