Low v. Freeman
Illinois Supreme Court
This was an action of replevin, brought in the Marshall Circuit Corirt, Low, the plaintiff below, took a change of venue ¡to Stark county. The action was founded upon the contract set out in the opinion of the Court. The defendants filed two pleas, first, that they did not wrongfully detain, &c.; second, property in themselves.
Read the full summary
This was an action of replevin, brought in the Marshall Circuit Corirt, Low, the plaintiff below, took a change of venue ¡to Stark county. The action was founded upon the contract set out in the opinion of the Court. The defendants filed two pleas, first, that they did not wrongfully detain, &c.; second, property in themselves. The cause was tried before Kellogg, Judge, and a jury, at ¡November term, 1850. The jury found for the defendants, and a judgment was entered accordingly. Low moved for a new trial, which was denied, and he thereupon prayed this appeal. The sheriff who executed the…
1Opinion of the CourtTreat, C. J.
The foundation of this suit was the following contract: “We, Samuel Freeman and Elijah Freeman, has this day sold to Wm. W. Low eight hundred bushels of corn, more ,or less, at twenty cents per bushel, to be delivered at the mouth of Sandy, Opposite of Henry, or at Wm. Fenn’s warehouse in Lacón, if any thing should happen that Low could not get a boat to take it from opposite of Henry; to be delivered by the first of August next in merchantable good order, at the customary weight per bushel; received on this contract five dollars, and the balance of the money to be paid when all of the corn…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Brooks v. TynerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Morgan v. EastIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
- Ogle v. Oklahoma City Horse & Mule Com. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- Elder v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaAppellate Court of Illinois · 1917
- Haverstick v. FergusIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.