10 Ill. 67 (Ill. 1848), Dazey v. Mills

CourtSupreme Court of Illinois
Writing for the CourtTREAT, C. J.
Citation10 Ill. 67
PartiesWILLIAM T. DAZEY v. ALEXANDER MILLS, for the use of Nathan Pinkham
DateInvalid date
Docket Number.

Page 67

10 Ill. 67 (Ill. 1848)

WILLIAM T. DAZEY

v.

ALEXANDER MILLS, for the use of Nathan Pinkham

Supreme Court of Illinois, Springfield

December, 1848

Page 68

[Syllabus Material]

Page 69

Error to Adams.

THIS was a suit originally commenced before a justice of the peace in Adams county by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff below, who appealed to the circuit court, and at the May term, 1848, the Hon. Norman H. Purple presiding, a jury was dispensed with, and the cause tried by the court, who rendered a judgment for plaintiff for $ 51.46, and costs.

The facts of the case are sufficiently stated by the court in the opinion.

Judgment affirmed.

A. WILLIAMS and C. B. LAWRENCE, for the plaintiff in error: 1. The court erred in giving judgment for the plaintiff for $ 57.16.

2. The court erred in excluding the evidence. The admission of the plaintiff on the record is always admissible and competent evidence against him, without regard to his interest. This is a positive and inflexible rule of law. Its wisdom is justified by the consideration that he could not be used as a witness in the case, and if it should appear that the admission was not made in good faith, but by collusion with the defendant to defeat the recovery by the person to whom he had passed his interest, this would destroy the effect of the admission, but would not affect its competency. Whether made in good faith or collusively is a question for the jury and not for the court, but in this case there is no pretence of collusion. Bauerman v. Radenius, 7 Durn. & East, 663, and note (b); 3 Harr. & Johns. 342; 3 Conn. 76; 4 do. 544.

3. In this case, the only evidence that Pinkham had any interest is furnished by the deposition itself, and it shows that Mills still had an interest in the note. It was not sold absolutely to Pinkham, but pledged as security for a debt which Mills owed him. If Pinkham failed to get the money of Dazey, he would resort to Mills for payment. So that upon the ground of interest, as well as his being a party to the record, his admission was competent evidence. The rule is, that the admissions of a party against his interest are evidence against him.

4. If, as the record shows, the deposition was admitted as competent evidence, then the judgment is for forty dollars more than it should have been, that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • 92 A. 974 (Vt. 1915), St. Albans Granite Company v. Elwell & Co.
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • January 23, 1915
    ...will be protected against the acts of the assignor, so far as can be done without prejudicing the rights of the debtor,-- Dazey v. Mills, 10 Ill. 67,--and the assignor will not be permitted to prejudice the rights of the assignee by receiving the money, releasing the debt, entering a retrax......
  • 63 Cal. 223, Barsolou v. Newton
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • March 2, 1883
    ...readiness to perform the remainder was, under the circumstances of the case, sufficient for the maintenance of the action. ( Brix v. Otto, 10 Ill. 70; Buffalo Catholic Inst. v. Bitter, 87 N.Y. 250.) The plaintiff was therefore entitled to a specific performance upon payment of the remainder......
2 cases
  • 92 A. 974 (Vt. 1915), St. Albans Granite Company v. Elwell & Co.
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • January 23, 1915
    ...will be protected against the acts of the assignor, so far as can be done without prejudicing the rights of the debtor,-- Dazey v. Mills, 10 Ill. 67,--and the assignor will not be permitted to prejudice the rights of the assignee by receiving the money, releasing the debt, entering a retrax......
  • 63 Cal. 223, Barsolou v. Newton
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • March 2, 1883
    ...readiness to perform the remainder was, under the circumstances of the case, sufficient for the maintenance of the action. ( Brix v. Otto, 10 Ill. 70; Buffalo Catholic Inst. v. Bitter, 87 N.Y. 250.) The plaintiff was therefore entitled to a specific performance upon payment of the remainder......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT