Decker v. Braverman

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decker v. Braverman

196 Ill. App. 387, 1915 Ill. App. LEXIS 147

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedOctober 20, 1915

DocketGen. No. 6,097

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 196 Ill. App. 387 (Decker v. Braverman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Decker v. Braverman, 196 Ill. App. 387, 1915 Ill. App. LEXIS 147 (Ill. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Niehaus

delivered the opinion of the court.

4. Sales, § 147*—to It at is not unreasonable delay in rejecting goods. In an action to recover for goods sold and delivered where defendant retained the goods in his warehouse for thirty days before examining and rejecting them as not in compliance with .the contract, held that defendant’s delay was not unreasonable under the evidence, he having the right to assume that the goods delivered were in compliance with the contract, in which case defendant would naturally not make haste to examine them. 5. Sales, § 105*—when sending of checlos in payment no waiver of compliance with contract. In an action to recover for goods sold and delivered where defendant retained the goods in his warehouse for thirty days before examining and rejecting them as not in compliance with the contract, the fact that before examination of the goods defendant sent plaintiff a check for less than the invoice price, held not to prove a waiver of plaintiff’s failure to comply with the contract, defendant not having at the time of sending the checks such knowledge of the defects in the goods that he could be presumed to have intended to waive such defects by sending such checks. 6. Contracts, § 203*—when contract of sale divisible. In a sale of goods consisting of independent items, of different articles with different prices, each item necessarily constitutes a separate contract. 7. Appeal and error, § 1088*—when only errors assigned in brief will be considered. On a writ of error the Appellate Court can only consider the errors discussed by appellant in his brief, although he declares he relies on all the errors assigned, including some not so discussed, since an appellant must abide by the case made by his opening brief, and if no case is made thereby, the judgment reviewed will be affirmed.

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

Mr. Justice Niehaus

delivered the opinion of the court.

4. Sales, § 147*—to It at is not unreasonable delay in rejecting goods. In an action to recover for goods sold and delivered where defendant retained the goods in his warehouse for thirty days before examining and rejecting them as not in compliance with .the contract, held that defendant’s delay was not unreasonable under the evidence, he having the right to assume that the goods delivered were in compliance with the contract, in which case defendant would naturally not make haste to examine them. 5. Sales, § 105*—when sending of checlos in payment no waiver of compliance with contract. In an action to recover for goods sold and delivered where defendant retained the goods in his warehouse for thirty days before examining and rejecting them as not in compliance with the contract, the fact that before examination of the goods defendant sent plaintiff a check for less than the invoice price, held not to prove a waiver of plaintiff’s failure to comply with the contract, defendant not having at the time of sending the checks such knowledge of the defects in the goods that he could be presumed to have intended to waive such defects by sending such checks. 6. Contracts, § 203*—when contract of sale divisible. In a sale of goods consisting of independent items, of different articles with different prices, each item necessarily constitutes a separate contract. 7. Appeal and error, § 1088*—when only errors assigned in brief will be considered. On a writ of error the Appellate Court can only consider the errors discussed by appellant in his brief, although he declares he relies on all the errors assigned, including some not so discussed, since an appellant must abide by the case made by his opening brief, and if no case is made thereby, the judgment reviewed will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

196 Ill. App. 387, 1915 Ill. App. LEXIS 147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/decker-v-braverman-illappct-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack