County of Christian v. Overholt
Illinois Supreme Court
Assumpsit, by plaintiff below, on a written contract in relation to building a court house. Plea, non^assimipsit, with notice that plaintiff did not perform; and a second plea that plaintiff did not perform.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, by plaintiff below, on a written contract in relation to building a court house. Plea, non^assimipsit, with notice that plaintiff did not perform; and a second plea that plaintiff did not perform. The bill of exceptions is in the words and figures following: Be it remembered, that on the trial of this cause, the plaintiffs gave, in evidence, the following contract and specifications, to wit: “ Article of agreement made and entered into this 3d day of February, A. D. 1854, by and between Jacob Overliolt and David F. Squier, of Christian county, of the first part, and Horatio M.…
1Opinion of the CourtCaton, J.
The declaration in this case is in assumpsit. The first count is on an agreement which is set out in hceo verba. This agreement provides that the plaintiffs below should, within a certain time, build a court house for the county, according to certain plans and specifications referred to. By the agreement, the county undertook to pay the plaintiffs two thousand dollars on a day named, and to give its bond for one thousand dollars when the foundations should be laid and the stone work done, and then the balance of the payments, amounting to $15,000, are specified.
The second count is on a…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. RichardsIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
- Underground Construction Co. v. Sanitary DistrictIllinois Supreme Court · 1937
- Kendall Bank Note Co. v. Commissioners of Sinking FundSupreme Court of Virginia · 1884
- Standard Finance Corp. v. BrelandMississippi Supreme Court · 1964
- Campbell & Cameron Co. v. WeisseWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.