This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Gannon (P) sued Britton (D) on a foreign judgment rendered in favor of P for $18,000 in Illinois. D answered that P was only a nominal party and that the real party in interest, Spike, the brother of P advised D that he was filing a suit to recover personal property owned by him and D and that P was a necessary defendant but that no judgment would be taken against P. P made no effort to defend the Illinois suit and discovered the judgment when P sued in this instance. P proved his claim and D was not permitted to defend with the extrinsic fraud evidence. Judgment was given P. D appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.