Smith v. Roberts
Appellate Court of Illinois
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Mills
We have here a lease.
And with it we have the doctrine of commercial frustration.
The trial judge held that the doctrine applied and that the lease was terminated thereby.
He was right. We affirm.
The Smiths and Roberts Brothers entered into a lease agreement for the rental of the first floor and basement of property located in Springfield at 111-113 North Sixth Street. Roberts Brothers was already operating a men’s clothing store next to the leased premises and intended to make an opening through their east wall and Smith’s west wall in order to establish a department which would be called the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Lloyd v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Leonard v. Autocar Sales & Service Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1945
- Cedar Park Cemetery Ass'n, Inc. v. CooperIllinois Supreme Court · 1951
- Proud v. W. S. Bills & Sons, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1970
- First National Bank v. VillegraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Northern Illinois Gas Co. v. Energy Cooperative, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1984
- Kurti v. Fox Valley Radiologists, Ltd.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1984
- Illinois-American Water Co. v. City of PeoriaAppellate Court of Illinois · 2002
- Heerey v. BerkeAppellate Court of Illinois · 1989
- Coca-Cola Co. Foods Division v. Olmarc Packaging Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1985
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.