Legal Opinion

McAllister v. Smith

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1856PublishedCited by 35 opinions

The plaintiffs below brought this action, which is assumpsit, against the defendant as the acceptor of five several bills of exchange. The declaration contains five special counts, and the common counts with copies of the bills set out.

Read the full summary

The plaintiffs below brought this action, which is assumpsit, against the defendant as the acceptor of five several bills of exchange. The declaration contains five special counts, and the common counts with copies of the bills set out. The first count is upon a bill of exchange drawn by McAllister & Co., bearing date the 2nd day of September, A. D. 1854, upon the defendant below, for the sum of two thousand dollars, payable to the order of the drawers, at the Merchants’ and Drovers’ Bank of Illinois, ten days after date, accepted by the defendant and indorsed by the drawers to the…

1Opinion of the Court

Scates, G. J.

The correctness of the order, striking the second and third pleas from the files for immateriality, depends upon the proper application of the principles of the law, which entered into and became part of the contract, within the intent and meaning of the parties. For the lex loci contractus, and the lex loci contractus rei sitce, when, respectively applicable, enter into and form part of every civil contract, respecting rights of property, in things, and choses in action, and so of lex domicilie, respecting mere personal contracts, such as marriages, &c. This is the general rule,…

2Cited by35 opinions

  1. Khan v. BDO Seidman, LLPAppellate Court of Illinois · 2011
  2. DeValk Lincoln Mercury, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
  3. Norton Sarnoff and Carl Fletcher, and v. American Home Products Corporation, Defendant-Appellant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
  4. Vencor, Incorporated v. David O. WebbCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
  5. Antonio C. Mastrobuono and Diana G. Mastrobuono v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc., a Corporation, Nick Diminico, Richard F. Benzer and Mark StevensonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API