Morton v. Tenny
Illinois Supreme Court
This was an action on a promissory note, tried before Davis, Judge, without the intervention of a jury, at April term, 1855, of the Tazewell Circuit Court. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, and the defendant took this appeal.
Read the full summary
This was an action on a promissory note, tried before Davis, Judge, without the intervention of a jury, at April term, 1855, of the Tazewell Circuit Court. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, and the defendant took this appeal. The only question raised upon the record, is one of variance*. The declaration described a note payable “ on or before” the first day of January; the note offered in evidence under the declaration, was made payable “ on” the first day of January. .It was insisted that this was a variance.
1Opinion of the Court
Scates, 0. J.
The note is sufficiently described in substance and legal effect; and this, we think, is all that can be required, to entitle the party to read it in evidence. It may be, and doubtless is true, that plaintiff could make a legal tender, and by it stop interest upon such a note as is described in the declaration, before the day of- payment therein. Tet that will not alter the legal effect of its terms. For it would not bo duo, nor could the owner maintain suit until .the day named. So the words import no obligation, arc not mutual, and consequently do not determine, import, or…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Bates v. LeclairSupreme Court of Vermont · 1877
- Tipton v. UtleyIllinois Supreme Court · 1871