Marc v. Kupfer
| Decision Date | 30 April 1864 |
| Citation | 1864 WL 2983,34 Ill. 286 |
| Parties | NICHOLAS MARCv.HERMAN KUPFER. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from Circuit Court of La Salle County.
Assumpsit by appellee, as indorsee, against appellant, as drawer, of the following bill of exchange:
“PERU, ILL., May 16, 1861.
At sight of this my first of exchange (second unpaid), pay to the order of R. G. Parks, Esq., $305.21, in funds current to-day, value received, and charge to account of
NICL. MARC.
HOFFMAN & GELPCKE, Chicago, Ill.”
The pleadings are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
It appeared upon the trial that on May 22, 1861, the bill was presented to the drawee by a notary, and payment demanded (in accordance with the plaintiff's instructions) in such bank notes as the Merchants' Savings, Loan and Trust Company received as current; and (payment being refused except in depreciated Illinois bank notes worth in coin from the 16th of May until said presentation only about seventy or seventy-five per cent of their face), protest was made on the day of presentation. It also appeared that such Illinois bank notes were, on the 16th of May, 1861, received by the majority of the Chicago banks as current; and, although not a circulating medium after May 18th, the banks received them till about the 26th, though they were deemed worth only the sum above stated.
The judgment in the court below was for the plaintiff.
It was insisted on behalf of the appellant, that the judgment was erroneous, among other reasons, because there was no issue joined upon the second plea, and because the court rendered judgment against the defendant upon demurrer to the second plea, when in fact it was the third plea that was demurred to, the second plea not being answered in any manner; because there was no sufficient demand of payment which it was insisted should have been unconditional for payment in money; because there was no legal evidence of due protest of said bill and due notice of protest to the drawer. It was also insisted that the words “funds current to-day” might be shown to have a local signification and to mean depreciated Illinois bank notes, and not the legal currency of the nation.
G. S. Eldridge, for appellant.
Leland & Blanchard, for appellee.
The record recites, that a replication was filed to the third plea, and also a demurrer to the same plea, and the judgment of the court was that the demurrer be sustained to the second plea. It is obvious that the demurrer was substantially to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Feder v. Elliott, 35643.
...Bank of Peru v. Farnsworth, 18 Ill. 563;Swift v. Whitney, 20 Ill. 144;Galena Insurance Co. v. Kupfer, 28 Ill. 332, 81 Am. Dec. 284;Marc v. Kupfer, 34 Ill. 286;Hunt v. Devine, 37 Ill. 137;Wood v. Price, 46 Ill. 435;Telford v. Patton, 144 Ill. 611, 33 N. E. 1119;Hatch v. First National Bank, ......
-
Feder v. Elliott
...4 Ala. 88; Bank of Peru v. Farnsworth, 18 Ill. 563; Swift v. Whitney, 20 Ill. 144; Galena Ins. Co. v. Kupfer, 28 Ill. 332; Marc v. Kupfer, 34 Ill. 286; Hunt Divine, 37 Ill. 137; Wood v. Price, 46 Ill. 435; Telford v. Patton, 144 Ill. 611, 33 N.E. 1119; Hatch v. First Nat. Bank, 94 Me. 348, ......
-
Welge v. Batty
...with payment except in money: Hawes v. Austin, 35 Ill. 396; Lawrence v. Schmidt, 35 Ill. 440; Willitts v. Paine, 43 Ill. 432; Marc v. Kuffer, 34 Ill. 286; Kuffer v. Marc, 28 Ill. 388; Nolan v. Jackson, 16 Ill. 272; 2 Parsons on Contracts, 615; Edwards on Bills, 550. An acceptance by a credi......
-
Stephani v. the Catholic Bishop of Chicago.
...76 Ill. 355; Corbett v. Underwood, 83 Ill. 324; Mann v. Swyser et al. 76 Ill. 365; Hypes v. Griffin, 11 Chicago Legal News, 33; Marc v. Kupfer, 34 Ill. 286; Osgood v. McConnell, 37 Ill. 75; Bissell v. Ryan, 23 Ill. 566; Packard v. Van Schoick, 58 Ill. 79. PLEASANTS, J. In each of two leases......