Archer v. Claflin

Illinois Supreme Court

Archer v. Claflin

31 Ill. 317

DecidedApril 15, 1863

StatusPublished

This text of 31 Ill. 317 (Archer v. Claflin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Archer v. Claflin, 31 Ill. 317 (Ill. 1863).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justioe Beeese

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This ease does not differ, in any essential particulars, from the preceding case. The objection, that there was a variance between the note described in the declaration, and the one on which the damages were assessed, has no foundation in fact.

The copy of the note, it is true, bore the date of 1860, but the note itself was dated in 1856, and was so described in the declaration. And on such note the damages were assessed by the clerk.

There is no error that we can discover in this record. The judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Justioe Beeese

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This ease does not differ, in any essential particulars, from the preceding case. The objection, that there was a variance between the note described in the declaration, and the one on which the damages were assessed, has no foundation in fact.

The copy of the note, it is true, bore the date of 1860, but the note itself was dated in 1856, and was so described in the declaration. And on such note the damages were assessed by the clerk.

There is no error that we can discover in this record. The judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 Ill. 317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/archer-v-claflin-ill-1863.