Ryerson v. Apland , 378 Ill. 472 ( 1941 )

I concur in the result reached in this case. There was, in my opinion, sufficient showing made to justify us in holding the chancellor did not abuse his discretion in setting aside the sale here involved. I do not agree with the expressions contained in the opinion that the rules pertaining to confirmation of partition sales expressed in Shultz v. Milburn,366 Ill. 400, and prior thereto, have been repudiated or overruled.