Low v. Getty
Illinois Supreme Court
It is alleged by the appellant that the pleas are bad because they show no sufficient consideration to support the contract set up in the pleas. The case shows that defendant had contracted to deliver to plaintiff corn, at tlie mouth of Sandy, or at Fenn’s warehouse in Lacón, in case anything should happen that plaintiff could not get a boat to take the corn from Sandy.
Read the full summary
It is alleged by the appellant that the pleas are bad because they show no sufficient consideration to support the contract set up in the pleas. The case shows that defendant had contracted to deliver to plaintiff corn, at tlie mouth of Sandy, or at Fenn’s warehouse in Lacón, in case anything should happen that plaintiff could not get a boat to take the corn from Sandy. Hie pleas aver that before the time of delivery under the first contract, a subsequent contract was made, by which, in consideration that the defendant then and there agreed with the plaintiff, at his request, that defendant…
1Opinion of the CourtCaton, J.
The only difference between this case and that of Low v. Forbs, decided at this term, is that in that case the pleas were admitted to be true by the demurrer, which we held to have been properly overruled; whereas, here issues were taken on the pleas, which the jury have found to be true by their verdict. The pleas being held sufficient, there is no pretense that the instructions given to the jury were not proper, for they involve really the same questions. The pleas being sustained, the instructions were correct.
I have more serious doubts about sustaining this verdict, on account of the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Miller v. BalthasserIllinois Supreme Court · 1875