Gyure v. Sloan Valve Co.

Decision Date17 December 1937
Docket NumberNo. 24301.,24301.
Citation367 Ill. 489,11 N.E.2d 963
PartiesGYURE v. SLOAN VALVE CO. et al.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court


Suit by Louis Gyure against the Sloan Valve Company and another. From the decree, the defendants appeal. Louis Gyure filed a motion to dismiss the appeal.

Appeal dismissed.Appeal from Circuit Court, Cook County; Stanley H. klarkowski, judge.

Heile, Cavender, Milchrist & Kaiser and Andrew Pettinger, all of Chicago, for appellants.

Oreb T. Crissey and K. B. Czarnecki, both of Chicago, for appellee.

JONES, Justice.

This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court of Cook county against the Sloan Valve Company, a corporation, for specific performance of a contract to conveycertain premises in the city of Chicago to Louis Gyure, and to enjoin the West Side Hungarian Evangelical and Reformed Church from prosecuting a forcible detainer proceeding against Gyure in the municipal court of Chicago.

On May 18, 1936, Gyure entered into a verbal contract with the Sloan Valve Company for the purchase of the property at the price of $3,000, payable half in cash, the balance of $1,500 payable in monthly installments of $20, each, with interest payable monthly, to be secured by notes and mortgage. Gyure paid the $1,500 on the same day, and the Sloan Valve Company executed and delivered to him the following memorandum:

May 18, 1936.

‘Received of Louis Gyure, 4323 Carroll Avenue, the sum of Fifteen Hundred Dollars ($1500) as part of the purchase price on [description of the property] at an agreed price of three thousand dollars ($3000), with the understanding that a formal contract will be drawn up as soon as possible.

‘Sloan Valve Company

‘T. C. Lane


A few days later Gyure went to the Sloan Valve Company's office for the execution of the formal contract. The testimony in his behalf shows that the representative of the valve company stated the transaction would be completed if Gyure would pay one year's back taxes and the $1,500 in cash, to which Gyure would not agree, that, finally, the company's representative stated they had changed their plans, intending to acquire the whole block and would not go through with the deal, and that Gyure later tendered the valve company three monthly installments with interest, which were refused. About four years previous to this contract Gyure rented the property from the church, entered into possession at that time, and has ever since occupied the premises, paying rent to the church up to May 30, 1936. The church's suit for possession was instituted in the municipal court and was still pending at the time of the hearing in this case.

The complaint sets out the making of the verbal contract and its terms, the memorandum, the refusal of the Sloan Valve Company to complete the transaction, and the institution of the suit for possession by the church. It charges the church was acting as agent of the Sloan Valve Company in collecting the rent, with knowledge of his purchase, and a conspiracy between the defendants to deprive him of his rights. The complaint does not set out the rate of interest which the unpaid purchase money was to bear, but the testimony shows it was to be at 6 per cent. per annum. The valve company filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds, among others, that the alleged written contract is within the statute of frauds (Ill.Rev.Stat.1937, c. 59, § 1), and that the complaint does not state a cause of action. The motion was overruled and the valve company was defaulted. The answer of the church denies that it was a party to or had knowledge of plaintiff's purchase; alleges the renting of the premises to plaintiff and his payment to it of the rent; denies the alleged agency and the allegations of fraud and collusion. No reply to the answer was filed. The chancellor heard the cause on the merits. An appeal is prosecuted by both defendants.

Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that this court ‘is without jurisdiction of the subject matter as the appellants have not filed any assignment of error or grounds for reversal as is required by the statute and rules of this court.’ Rule 36 (Ill.Rev.Stat.1937, c. 110, § 259.36) provides: ‘No assignment of errors or cross-errors shall be necessary, except the statement in the brief, at the conclusion of the statement of the case, of the errors relied upon for reversal, as required in rule 39.’ Rule 39 (Ill.Rev.Stat.1937, c. 110, § 259.39) provides, in substance, that the brief of appellant shall contain a short and clear statement of the case, showing, among other things, the errors relied upon for reversal, and that the statement of the case shall be followed by the propositions of law and the authorities relied upon to support them. Appellant's statement of the case contains no statement of the errors relied upon for reversal. The requirements of rule 39 are not new. By long practice the generally called ‘brief’ is divided into three parts: (1) The statement of the case,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Harper v. Sallee
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • June 4, 1941
    ... ... Appellant can only rely on the points stated by him as grounds for reversal. Gyure v. Sloan Valve Co. 367 Ill. 489, 492, 11 N.E.2d 963. The original foreclosure decree found the ... ...
  • Hayes v. Indus. Comm'n
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • May 20, 1943
    ... ... 795. Rules of court are adopted to promote the work of the court and have the force of law. Gyure v. Sloan Valve Co., 367 Ill. 489, 11 N.E.2d 963. Failure of the abstract to properly present the ... ...
  • Pape v. Pareti
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • June 9, 1942
    ...have presented a petition for rehearing, wherein they say that we have overlooked or ignored the binding effect of Gyure v. Sloan Valve Co., 367 Ill. 489, 11 N.E.2d 963, which is said to be decisive of the question whether failure of the appealing party to attach statement of errors to its ......
  • People ex rel. Pickerill v. New York Cent. R. Co.
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • November 15, 1945 Sholty v. McIntyre, 136 Ill. 33, 26 N.E. 655;Freeport Motor Casualty Co. v. Madden, 354 Ill. 486, 188 N.E. 415;Gyure v. Sloan Valve Co., 367 Ill. 489, 11 N.E.2d 963. These cases are not, however, controlling on this question. We are not concerned here with the complete failure of the par......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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