Carter v. White
| Decision Date | 30 November 1863 |
| Citation | 1863 WL 3209,32 Ill. 509 |
| Parties | GEORGE W. CARTER et al.v.EDWARD H. WHITE. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
ERROR to Circuit Court of Pulaski County.
Action brought by defendant in error against plaintiffs in error, the action being styled, in the summons and declaration, as “a plea of trespass on the case.”
The cause was tried by the court upon the plea of the general issue, with notice of a special defense, and a judgment rendered for the plaintiff.
The question raised by the assignments of error was as to the nature of the cause. The bill of exceptions did not preserve the evidence.
George S. Pidgeon and John Dougherty, for plaintiffs in error.
Wm. H. Green and S. P. Wheeler, for defendant in error.
The action of assumpsit, so called, is an action on the case, and is properly entitled an action of trespass on the case. To determine the cause of action, whether for a tort or on promises, we must look to the declaration. The first and second counts1 are very inartificially drawn, to say the least, and are meaningless. The third, fourth and fifth counts are counts in assumpsit. The judgment is correctly entered against all the defendants, as appears by the amended record filed.
As there are no facts preserved by the bill of exceptions, we cannot determine whether the court, sitting as a jury, found correctly or not. We must intend the court had sufficient evidence before it to justify its finding, and we must affirm the judgment.
Judgment affirmed.
1. These counts referred to a certain contract alleged to have been entered into between the parties.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Roe v. Cook Cnty.
...as the breach of duty relied upon is the same and it contains all the necessary averments of fact for an action in assumpsit. Carter v. White, 32 Ill. 509;Citizens' Gas-Light Co. v. Granger & Co., 118 Ill. 266, 8 N. E. 770. The judgment was rendered by default, and, after examining the decl......
-
Harty Bros. & Harty Co. v. Polakow
...under an action in assumpsit. First Nat. Bank v. Gatton, 172 Ill. 625, 50 N. E. 121;De Wolf v. City of Chicago, 26 Ill. 443;Carter v. White, 32 Ill. 509;Toledo, Wabash & Western Railway Co. v. Chew, 67 Ill. 378;First Baptist Church of Chicago v. Andrews, 87 Ill. 172. Appellant argues that, ......
-
Derk P. Yonkerman Co. v. Charles H. Fuller's Advertising Agency
... ... Morrison v. Rogers, 3 Ill. 317; Kellogg v ... Turpie, 93 Ill 265, 34 Am.Rep. 163; Johnston v ... Salisbury, 61 Ill. 316. See, also, Carter v ... White, 32 Ill. 509; Willenborg v. I.C.R.R., 11 ... Ill.App. 302; Sherburne v. Tobey Furniture Co., 19 ... Ill.App. 619 ... There ... ...
-
Potter v. Brown
... ... cause of action is for a tort or upon promises, resort must ... be had to the substance of the counts: Carter v ... White, 32 Ill. 509; and the declaration set out fully ... the very promise and undertaking entered into and upon which ... a recovery was ... ...