Legal Opinion

Heeringa v. Ortlepp

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided February 21, 1912No. Gen. No. 16,242PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph Z. Uhmr, Judge, presiding.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Duncan

Plaintiffs in error, doing business as Michigan Tea Busk Company, sued William Ortlepp and Samuel Hoffman, defendants in error, upon an account for goods sold and delivered to Hoffman, March 25, 1908, to September 24, 1908; The suit, on motion of plaintiffs in error, was dismissed as to Hoffman. In a trial without a jury the court rendered judgment against the plaintiffs in error, who ask a reversal of the judgment.

Defendant in error, Ortlepp, was sued as guarantor. Prior to July 23,1908, the traveling salesman of plaintiffs in error, in their behalf, told Ortlepp that he would not sell…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Taussig v. ReidIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Swisher v. DeeringIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Malleable Iron Range Co. v. PuseyIllinois Supreme Court · 1910

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. TH Davidson and Company v. Eidola ConcreteAppellate Court of Illinois · 2012
  2. Reconstruction Finance Corp. v. KlinkAppellate Court of Illinois · 1941
  3. Stephenson School Supply Co. v. County of LancasterNebraska Supreme Court · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API