Getz v. Thomson & Burton Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Getz v. Thomson & Burton Co.

178 Ill. App. 638, 1913 Ill. App. LEXIS 1113

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedApril 21, 1913

DocketGen. No. 17,334

StatusPublished

This text of 178 Ill. App. 638 (Getz v. Thomson & Burton Co.) 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

Getz v. Thomson & Burton Co., 178 Ill. App. 638, 1913 Ill. App. LEXIS 1113 (Ill. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Smith

delivered tlie opinion of the court.

This was a suit brought to recover a balance due on a purchase by the defendant, here plaintiff in error, of eleven cars of coal from the Crawford Coal Co., who assigned its claim to the plaintiff below. On a hearing without a jury the court found the issues for the plaintiff and entered judgment on the finding against the defendant for one thousand dollars.

The defendant ordered ten cars of Brazil Block Lump coal and one car of Indiana Block, lower vein, coal at a price of two dollars per ton. The evidence on the part of the defendant tended to show that a portion of the coal shipped to the defendant on the said order was mine run coal, an inferior quality and less value than the price sought to be recovered of two dollars per ton, and by reason thereof claimed damages and that it was entitled to recoup therefor. There was no warranty by the seller, the Crawford Coal Co., and the defendant, after an opportunity for inspection, received and used the coal so shipped, thereby accepting same. In America Theatre Co. v. Siegel, Cooper & Co., 221 Ill. 145, the court say: “The law does not permit a person to receive goods under a contract, appropriate them to his own use, and then defeat an action for the purchase price on the ground that the goods were not of the exact quality or description called for by the contract. His remedy, in the absence of a warranty, is to refuse to accept the goods when delivered, or to return them within a reasonable time after the departure from the terms of the contract is discovered,” citing authorities. See also Barker v. Turnbull, 51 Ill. App. 226.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Smith

delivered tlie opinion of the court.

This was a suit brought to recover a balance due on a purchase by the defendant, here plaintiff in error, of eleven cars of coal from the Crawford Coal Co., who assigned its claim to the plaintiff below. On a hearing without a jury the court found the issues for the plaintiff and entered judgment on the finding against the defendant for one thousand dollars.

The defendant ordered ten cars of Brazil Block Lump coal and one car of Indiana Block, lower vein, coal at a price of two dollars per ton. The evidence on the part of the defendant tended to show that a portion of the coal shipped to the defendant on the said order was mine run coal, an inferior quality and less value than the price sought to be recovered of two dollars per ton, and by reason thereof claimed damages and that it was entitled to recoup therefor. There was no warranty by the seller, the Crawford Coal Co., and the defendant, after an opportunity for inspection, received and used the coal so shipped, thereby accepting same. In America Theatre Co. v. Siegel, Cooper & Co., 221 Ill. 145, the court say: “The law does not permit a person to receive goods under a contract, appropriate them to his own use, and then defeat an action for the purchase price on the ground that the goods were not of the exact quality or description called for by the contract. His remedy, in the absence of a warranty, is to refuse to accept the goods when delivered, or to return them within a reasonable time after the departure from the terms of the contract is discovered,” citing authorities. See also Barker v. Turnbull, 51 Ill. App. 226.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

178 Ill. App. 638, 1913 Ill. App. LEXIS 1113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/getz-v-thomson-burton-co-illappct-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack