Arenz v. Weir

• Decision Date: 30 June 1878
• Citation: 1878 WL 9949,89 Ill. 25
• Parties: SAMUEL ARENZv.JOHN H. WEIR.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

89 Ill. 25

1878 WL 9949 (Ill.)

SAMUEL ARENZ

v.JOHN H. WEIR.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June Term, 1878.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

WRIT OF ERROR to the Circuit Court of Madison county; the Hon. WILLIAM H. SNYDER, Judge, presiding.

Mr. LEVI DAVIS, for the plaintiff in error.

Messrs. METCALF & BRADSHAW, for the defendant in error.

Mr. JUSTICE BREESE delivered the opinion of the Court:

This case is, in its prominent and important features, like the case of Butler v. Walker, 80 Ill. 345, with this exception, there were no issues of fact in this case, there having been a general demurrer to the declaration, which admitted all the facts well pleaded. It admits that the Lamar Insurance Company was duly incorporated by the General Assembly of this State, and afterwards, another act was passed conferring upon this incorporation greater rights and privileges, all which powers the corporation exercised, had their office at Chicago, and issued policies of insurance on property; that the company, for a valuable consideration, paid by plaintiff, issued and delivered to him a policy of insurance on his property, to the amount of two thousand dollars, on his building on Kinzie street, in Chicago, and his stock of hardware in that building, agreeing thereby to make good to the plaintiff all loss or damage, not exceeding two thousand dollars, as should happen by fire, from March 11, 1871, to March 11, 1872; that the property was destroyed by the fire of October 9, 1871; that proofs were made to the satisfaction of the company; that the company, immediately after the fire, was insolvent, and unable to pay its creditors, and was, on November 22, 1872, placed in the hands of a receiver, by order of the Superior Court of Cook county; that plaintiff, on October 3, 1872, commenced his action on this policy in the Superior Court of Cook county, and on December 17, 1872, recovered a judgment against the company for two thousand one hundred and ten dollars; that he proved up his claim in the proceedings wherein the receiver was appointed, and the receiver paid him fifty-two per cent of his claim; that there is due and unpaid of his judgment, with interest, ten hundred and fifteen dollars; that the capital stock of this company was five million dollars; that the whole amount thereof has never been paid in, and no certificate thereof given or recorded, as the statute requires; that defendant, at all these times, was a corporator and stockholder in the company, and had subscribed for and owned fifty shares of the capital stock, at the price of one hundred dollars for each share, amounting to the sum of five thousand dollars, whereby defendant has become liable, etc.

All these facts, but not the inference from them, are admitted to be true by the defendant, and we can not see wherein the case differs from the case cited supra.

Section 25, of the act of ...