McCully v. Silverburgh
Illinois Supreme Court
This declaration contained several counts. 1st count—On note payable to Morris P. 2d count—On note made to plaintiff by the name and addition of Moses -P., administrator, etc.; plaintiff avers he is the same person mentioned as the payee. 3d count—Money count for interest. 4th count—Work and labor; materials, goods, wares and merchandise; money had and received; money lent; amount due on an accounting. Lamar and Strakey file the general issue.
Read the full summary
This declaration contained several counts. 1st count—On note payable to Morris P. 2d count—On note made to plaintiff by the name and addition of Moses -P., administrator, etc.; plaintiff avers he is the same person mentioned as the payee. 3d count—Money count for interest. 4th count—Work and labor; materials, goods, wares and merchandise; money had and received; money lent; amount due on an accounting. Lamar and Strakey file the general issue. McCully demurs to the first and second counts. Plea of general issue to the third and fourth counts that he did not undertake, etc., tndplea of set-off…
1Opinion of the CourtCaton, J.
The objection that the similiter was not added to the plea of the general issue, is not founded on fact. The similiter appears by the record to have been added, though not signed by the plaintiffs’ attorneys. This was not necessary. The defendant may add the similiter to his plea concluding to the country, which forms a good issue, if not stricken out or objected to by the plaintiffs’ attorney. If he goes to trial upon such an issue, he is held to have adopted the act of the defendant’s attorney, who is precluded from objecting to the want of the signature of the plaintiffs’ attorney.
Ror is…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Countiss v. WhitingAppellate Court of Illinois · 1940
- Hazen & Lundy v. Pierson & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1876
- Nieman v. WintkerIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
- Second National Bank of Beloit v. WoodruffAppellate Court of Illinois · 1904