Pieser v. Minkota Milling Co.
Appellate Court of Illinois
Assumpsit, for merchandise sold, etc. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Joseph E. Gary, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1900. Remittitur suggested. If entered according to the suggestion the judgment will be affirmed for the remainder.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, for merchandise sold, etc. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Joseph E. Gary, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1900. Remittitur suggested. If entered according to the suggestion the judgment will be affirmed for the remainder. Statement.—This is an action by appellee to recover the alleged contract price of 500 sacks of flour, equal, it is said, to 337 barrels, at the price of $3.85 per barrel; also the value of 250 jute sacks claimed to be worth ten cents each. There had been previous dealings between the parties, which…
1Opinion of the Court
Mt?. Justice Freeman
delivered the opinion of the court.
Counsel for both parties apparently agree that the only material issue of fact is whether the flour in controversy conformed to the sample by which it was purchased. If there was evidence warranting the finding of the jury upon this issue, we should not be justified in disturbing the verdiet unless there was some injurious error in the admission or rejection of evidence, or in giving or refusing instructions. We do not deem it necessary to consider in detail the evidence offered on the part of appellants to show that the flour shipped was…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Illinois Central Railroad v. Cobb, Blaisdell & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1874
- County of Franklin v. LaymanIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
- Hatterman v. ThompsonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1899
3Cited by3 opinions
- Enrique Olvera and Jeffrey Dawson v. Blitt & Gaines, P.C.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2005
- Reeb v. BronsonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1915
- Olvera, Enrique S. v. Blitt & Gaines, P.C.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2005