Dickhut v. Durrell
Illinois Supreme Court
This was an action of covenant instituted in the Adams Circuit Court, by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error, upon a sealed agreement of the parties, in substance as follows, viz1: “That the said Thomas Durrell agrees to raft at Hill’s mill, on the Wisconsin river, 110,000 feet of pine lumber,which belongs to said William Dickhut and Robert Bennison, and to deliver said raft, in good order, on the wharf at the city of Quincy, as soon as the same can be…
Read the full summary
This was an action of covenant instituted in the Adams Circuit Court, by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error, upon a sealed agreement of the parties, in substance as follows, viz1: “That the said Thomas Durrell agrees to raft at Hill’s mill, on the Wisconsin river, 110,000 feet of pine lumber,which belongs to said William Dickhut and Robert Bennison, and to deliver said raft, in good order, on the wharf at the city of Quincy, as soon as the same can be done; all at the expense and charge of the said Durrell. In consideration of which the said Dickhut agrees to pay the said…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Mr. Justice Trumbull :
We regret that the record in this case is so made up as to prevent an examination of the merits of some of the errors assigned, otherwise we should have no hesitation in reversing the judgment.
No exception was taken to the decision of the Court overruling the motion for a new trial, nor is any allusion made to that motion in the bill of exceptions. The plaintiff in error cannot now, therefore, object that his motion for a new trial was disallowed, nor can he avail himself of any error of the court in giving instructions, because the record does not show that…
2Cited by27 opinions
- Chicago & Alton Railroad v. ClausenIllinois Supreme Court · 1898
- Coker v. HayesSupreme Court of Florida · 1878
- James v. DexterIllinois Supreme Court · 1885
- East St. Louis Electric Street Railroad v. CauleyIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
- Firemen's Insurance v. PeckIllinois Supreme Court · 1888
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.