Legal Opinion

Bushnell v. Bishop Hill Colony

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1862PublishedCited by 2 opinions

This is an action of assumpsit by appellee, for the use of Claudius Jones, George A. Morse, Olof Johnson and "Wheeler B. Sweet, receivers, etc., and originally commenced by attachment to the March term of the Henry Circuit Court. Declaration.

Read the full summary

This is an action of assumpsit by appellee, for the use of Claudius Jones, George A. Morse, Olof Johnson and "Wheeler B. Sweet, receivers, etc., and originally commenced by attachment to the March term of the Henry Circuit Court. Declaration. Eirst count, on account stated November 13, 1857, for $118.46. Second count, on account stated November 26, 1857, for $20. Third count, on account stated April 14, 1858, for $110.03. Eourth count, on account stated May 11, 1858, for $17.83. Sixth count, as follows : And for that whereas one Samuel H. Bushnell, before and at the time of the making of the…

1Opinion of the Court

Catón, C. J.

This action was brought to recover the value of goods furnished to Samuel H. Bushnell, a son of the defendant. On the trial, Mr. Hnsted testified, that in 1858 he received a letter from the defendant, which he left with the defendant’s wife, at the house where she then lived, a few miles from the court house. Since then, the defendant and his wife had removed to Rew York, where he was at the time of the trial. A notice was served upon the defendant’s attorney to produce the letter, a day or two before the trial. It was admitted that the attorney had not the letter in his…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Goldring v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Florida · 1909
  2. Jack v. RowlandAppellate Court of Illinois · 1901

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

Powered by the Exa API