Knotts v. Preble

• Decision Date: 31 January 1869
• Citation: 1869 WL 5210,99 Am.Dec. 514,50 Ill. 226
• Parties: GEORGE W. KNOTTS et al.v.CHARLES H. PREBLE.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

50 Ill. 226

1869 WL 5210 (Ill.)

99 Am.Dec. 514

GEORGE W. KNOTTS et al.

v.CHARLES H. PREBLE.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

January Term, 1869.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of McLean county; the Hon. JOHN M. SCOTT, Judge, presiding.

The opinion states the case.

Messrs. TIPTON, BENJAMIN & ROWELL, for the appellants.

Messrs. WILLIAMS & BURR, for the appellee.

Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE BREESE delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was an action of assumpsit, in the McLean Circuit Court, by George W. Knotts and Matthew A. Steers, late partners, against Charles H. Preble, on a promissory note, and verdict and judgment for the defendant.

The defense was, no consideration. The cause was tried by a jury, and much testimony heard.

It appears that Preble had an insurance on a stock of goods in a store room in Lexington, which was totally destroyed by fire, which extended to the store of the plaintiffs, who lost several thousand dollars by the accident.

The plaintiffs, by Knotts, persuaded the defendant that he was under some sort of obligation to bear a part of their loss, stating that the fire was occasioned by a defective flue in the defendant's building, and that he could prove it, and that he could prove things about the fire that defendant little thought of. After some conversation and negotiation, the defendant gave the note in suit, under the belief that plaintiffs had some kind of a claim on him, and under the influence of representations made to him by Knotts that he could prove the fire took place from defendant's stove pipe, and that he had been notified to fix the pipe and flue, and that he had paid no attention to the notice.

Knotts, in his examination, stated that when he went to see Preble, he told him he had investigated the matter, and that he, Preble, was the cause of the fire.

It was under these circumstances the note was given, and as not the slightest evidence was given to connect Preble with the fire, as occasioned by him, there was no legal or moral obligation upon him to make good any of the losses of Knotts & Steers. The note was evidently given on the supposition, awakened by the artfulness of Knotts, that Preble was liable. Knotts had not investigated the matter, and had no ground for the pretense.

It is no doubt true, that a promise made to settle a doubtful right, or to get rid of a probable liability, is binding, and made upon a good and valuable consideration, and it is no defense for the promissor to say he was mistaken...