Morrill v. Baggott

• Decision Date: 15 May 1895
• Citation: 41 N.E. 639,157 Ill. 240
• Parties: MORRILL v. BAGGOTT.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

157 Ill. 240

41 N.E. 639

MORRILL

v.BAGGOTT.¹

Supreme Court of Illinois.

May 15, 1895.²

Appeal from appellate court, First district.

Assumpsit by Edward Baggott against Charles A. Morrill. Plaintiff obtained judgment, which was affirmed by the appellate court. 57 Ill. App. 530. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Baker, J., dissenting.

Ashcraft, Gordon & Cox, for appellant.

H. C. Bennett and W. A. Phelps, for appellee.

BAILEY, J.

On the 29th day of April, 1890, Edward Baggott leased to Robert F. Berdie and Otto Richter, for the term of five years from May 1, 1890, certain premises in Chicago, reserving as rent the sum of $17,500, payable in monthly installments of $291.67 each. By a contract of guaranty indorsed upon the lease, Charles A. Morrill guarantied the payment of the rent reserved by the lessees, and the performance by them of the covenants and agreements in the lease contained. This is a suit in assumpsit, brought by Baggott against Morrill upon the contract of guaranty. The defendant appeared and filed a number of special pleas in bar, to all of which a demurrer was sustained, and the defendant elected to abide by his pleas. Judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff for $1,541.69 and costs. That judgment has been affirmed by the appellate court on appeal, and this appeal is from the judgment of affirmance.

The defendant's counsel, in his argument in this court, seems to rely upon only two of the pleas, viz. the fifth and seventh, and therefore those pleas only need be considered. The fifth plea alleges, in substance, that before the lessees had occupied the demised premises under the lease, and before any rent had become due, to wit, on April 30, 1890, the plaintiff varied the terms and conditions of the lease, by agreeing in writing with the lessees, that they, the lessees, should do certain carpenter work and make certain improvements on the premises, in consideration of which the plaintiff agreed to allow and credit to the lessees $700 in lieu of the rents reserved in the lease; that after the making of such agreement the lessees, or one of them, entered upon and occupied the demised premises, and did a large amount of carpenter work thereon in pursuance of the agreement; that the agreement was made by the plaintiff and the lessees without the consent of the defendant; and that, by reason of the premises, the terms of the lease were changed and altered without the consent of the defendant, by reason whereof the defendant was and is released and discharged from all obligation of liability upon his guaranty. The seventh plea alleges, in substance, that after the making of the lease and guaranty the lessees, or one of them, at the request of the plaintiff, on June 1, 1890, performed a large amount of labor and furnished a large amount of material in making certain improvements on the demised premises, at an agreed price of $700, which material and labor were received and accepted by the plaintiff in payment of all promises and obligations of the defendant in the declaration alleged.

We are of the opinion that neither of these pleas presents a defense to the action. By the fifth plea the defendant seeks to invoke the rule of law that...