Legal Opinion

Clark & Bosquit v. Laumann

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided March 23, 1894PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Error to the City Court of East St. Louis; the Hon. B. H. Canby, Judge, presiding.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Scofield

This suit was brought by the plaintiffs to recover for work done and materials furnished by them, as partners, in the erection of a certain two-story brick building for the defendant. During the progress of the suit, the defendant filed a plea, alleging that after the commencement of the suit, the plaintiffs, for the consideration of $75, had released the defendant from all claims of every kind and had directed the dismissal of all suits brought by the plaintiffs against the defendant, then pending in the City Court of East St. Louis or in any other court.

The second amended replication…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Canal Co. v. GordonSupreme Court of the United States · 1868

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Freedman v. Montague Associates, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Lauman v. BosquitAppellate Court of Illinois · 1898
  3. Rice v. BarkmanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1928

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API