Hyde v. Love Bros.
Appellate Court of Illinois
Assumpsit.—Goods sold and delivered. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. William G. Ewing, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1895.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Waterman
The case seems to have been tried upon the theory that as all iron was to be inspected on the cars before being unloaded, after the iron was so unloaded no objection thereto could be made. We do not think that appellant was concluded by a failure to inspect the iron before it was unloaded.
The contract does not provide that objections to the iron could not be made after it had been unloaded. The contract was to furnish cast iron columns, etc., for buildings to be erected in Chicago; it was to be paid for by weight. Under such an arrangement, appellees’ interest was to make the columns, etc.,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Underwood v. WolfIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
- Doane v. DunhamIllinois Supreme Court · 1872
- Doane v. DunhamIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
- Mears v. NicholsIllinois Supreme Court · 1866
- Underwood v. WolfAppellate Court of Illinois · 1889
3Cited by1 opinion
- Eagle Iron Works Co. v. Franklin County Collieries Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1913