Crabtree v. Kile

• Court: Supreme Court of Illinois
• Writing for the Court: WALKER
• Citation: 21 Ill. 180,11 Peck 180,1859 WL 6724
• Decision Date: 31 January 1859
• Parties: JOHN CRABTREE, Plaintiff in Error,v.WILLIAM KILE, et al., Defendants in Error.

21 Ill. 180
1859 WL 6724 (Ill.)
11 Peck (IL) 180

JOHN CRABTREE, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
WILLIAM KILE, et al., Defendants in Error.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

January Term, 1859.

ERROR TO EDGAR.

In impeaching the credit of a witness, his general reputation is the subject of inquiry, not particular facts. The impeaching witness must be able to state what is generally said of the person to be impeached, among his associates.

It is error to permit one witness to speak of the character of another, unless he knows what the general character of that other is.

Where a vendor of chattels, having title, sells with warranty as to quality; and a consideration is given, and possession is taken under the sale, the vendee must rely on the contract of warranty, to recover for any loss resulting from defects covered by it. And the vendee, without the concurrence of the vendor, cannot rescind the sale, so as to revest the title in the vendor. Therefore a notice of the defect or an offer to return the property is unnecessary, in order to recover damages.

Damages for a breach of warranty of chattels sold, may be recovered in an independent suit, or they may be set off, in an action on the contract for the sale of them.

Where diseased cattle were sold, under a warranty of their healthiness, the measure of damages is the difference between the contract price agreed upon for healthy animals, and their value as diseased animals at the time of delivery, together with any other immediate injury resulting from the breach of warranty.

If cattle were bought, warranted to be in health, the purchaser notifying the seller at the time, that he designed to ship them directly to New York to sell for beef--and he did so ship them, the purchaser may recover for loss and expenses incurred, on those that showed disease or died on the passage.

[21 Ill. 181]

THIS was an action of assumpsit, brought by Kile & Nichols originally in the Edgar Circuit Court against John Crabtree on a promissory note, dated October 4th, 1856, for $2,550.00, executed by Crabtree to Kile and Nichols, for a lot of eighty-one head of fat cattle sold by plaintiff to defendant, and removed by change of venue to Coles county.

The declaration contains a special count upon the note, and the usual common counts.

The defendant pleaded the general issue, with notice that he would give in evidence that the note was executed in payment for a lot of fat cattle sold by plaintiff to defendant for the New York market; that the plaintiff warranted the cattle sound and free from the disease called milk sick or trembles; that said cattle had the disease at the time, and that it developed itself on the way to New York, to which market the defendant shipped the cattle, and that about forty head were lost and died on the way, in consequence of it; also that the residue of the cattle, in consequence of their diseased condition, were of no value in market and wholly lost to defendant, by reason of which he sustained great damage by the said breach of the warranty of the plaintiffs, and incurred necessarily heavy expenses in doctoring and taking care of the cattle, and by the delays occasioned in consequence of the diseased condition of the cattle; all of which he wishes to set off by way of recoupment against the plaintiff's claims on the note, and asks judgment for the balance that may be found due him.

There were, also, notices of other grounds of defense, in consequence of the diseased condition of the cattle which the defendant proposed to offer in evidence, founded on deceit, fraudulent concealment, fraudulent representations of the plaintiff, etc., going some to partial and others to entire failure of the consideration of the note sued upon, and by way of recoupment and set-off.

On the trial of the case the plaintiff offered in evidence the note which is in the words and figures following:

+---------------------------------------------+
                ¦$2,550.00.¦Paris, Illinois, Oct. 4th, 1856. ¦
                +---------------------------------------------+
                

Twenty days after date I promise to pay Kile & Nichols or order, twenty-five hundred and fifty dollars, for value received.

+-----------------------+
                ¦Signed,¦JOHN CRABTREE. ¦
                +-----------------------+
                

With the following credits endorsed upon it: “Received Nov. 4th, 1856, on the within note, one thousand dollars. Kile & Nichols.”“Credit on the within note by twelve steers, at thirty-four dollars each, being four hundred and eight dollars. Oct. 12th, 1856. Kile & Nichols.”

And the plaintiffs then rested their case.

The defendant then offered in evidence the foregoing credits on the note, and proved by J. W. Blackburn that Kile, one of the defendants, admitted the note was given for the eighty-one head of cattle. That he was acquainted with Kile and Nichols' farm, at Mulberry Grove, and that milk sick prevailed in that vicinity in 1846-7, and since; that the...