Tilden v. Rosenthal
Illinois Supreme Court
Whit of Ebbob to the Superior Court of Chicago. This was an action of assumpsit commenced in the Recorder’s Court of the city of Chicago, by Tilden and McCoy, against Henry S. Rosenthal & Co., to recover damages resulting to the plaintiffs in the refusal of the defendants to accept or receive one hundred and seventy-eight head of cattle, alleged to have been sold and tendered by the plaintiffs to the defendants, and which the latter refused to accept.
Read the full summary
Whit of Ebbob to the Superior Court of Chicago. This was an action of assumpsit commenced in the Recorder’s Court of the city of Chicago, by Tilden and McCoy, against Henry S. Rosenthal & Co., to recover damages resulting to the plaintiffs in the refusal of the defendants to accept or receive one hundred and seventy-eight head of cattle, alleged to have been sold and tendered by the plaintiffs to the defendants, and which the latter refused to accept. The cause was removed into the Superior Court of Chicago, on a change of venue. The contract between the parties in reference to the cattle,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Lawrence
The plaintiffs entered into a written contract with the defendants, by which they contracted to deliver to them, by a certain day, “ two hundred and sixty-two head, more or less, of good fat cattle. * * * To average thirteen hundred pounds, and are the cattle known as the McCoy & Bishop lot, now being fed in the vicinity of Council Bluffs, Iowa.” The plaintiffs tendered one hundred and seventy-eight head by the day named, which the defendants refused to receive, whereupon the plaintiffs brought suit. The only question is, whether this was a sufficient performance, and we are of opinion that…
2Cited by5 opinions
- City of Chicago v. GalpinIllinois Supreme Court · 1899
- Bishop v. MorganIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
- Bloomingdale v. HewittAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Peterson v. ChaixCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
- T. Buettner & Co. v. SamuelsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1911