Carpen v. Hall
Illinois Supreme Court
The facts of the case are the same as in the case which was decided in the twenty-seventh volume of these Reports, (Hall v. Carpen, 27 Ill. 386,) which see, for the history of the transaction.
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
If defendant in error received money from the cattle broker, which he should have paid to plaintiff in error, an action manifestly accrued to the broker for its recovery. Plaintiff in error clearly had a right of recovery against the broker to recover the money for which his cattle were sold. The money was not commingled into a common fund by the parties, nor could it be without their consent. The broker was separately employed, by each of the parties, to sell their several lots of cattle, and each had a claim against him for the money received by him on their account. If the broker paid…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hall v. CarpenIllinois Supreme Court · 1862
3Cited by6 opinions
- Drovers' National Bank v. O'HareIllinois Supreme Court · 1887
- State National Bank v. PayneAppellate Court of Illinois · 1894
- Neill v. ChessenAppellate Court of Illinois · 1884
- Atteberry v. JacksonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1884
- Dumois v. HillNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.