Gillilan v. Gray

14 Ill. 416
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedJune 15, 1853
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 14 Ill. 416 (Gillilan v. Gray) 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
Gillilan v. Gray, 14 Ill. 416 (Ill. 1853).

Opinion

Treat, C. J.

The special causes of demurrer presented no valid objection to the declaration. Under the decision of this court, in the case of Kenney v. Greer, 13 Illinois, 432, where process issues to a foreign county, the declaration need not contain any averment as to the residence of the plaintiff, or the accruing of the cause of action. If the cause of action does not arise in the county in which the suit is brought, or the plaintiff does not reside there when it is commenced, the objection must be taken advantage of by motion, or by plea in abatement. Such an objection is of a dilatory character, and if not interposed in one of these modes before answering to the merits, it is to be considered as waived.

The first count of the declaration is good on general demurrer. It alleges in substance, that the defendants, in consideration that the plaintiffs would buy of them a reaping and grass cutting machine for the price of $ 125, undertook that the same was well made of good materials, and would work well if properly managed; that the plaintiffs, relying upon this promise, purchased the machine, and paid the price demanded ; and that the machine was not well made of good materials, and would not operate well when properly managed, but was of no use or value. This clearly shows a warranty, and a breach thereof. It was not necessary to point out the defects in the article with greater particularity. As the demurrer must be overruled, if there is one good count in the declaration, it will not be necessary to inquire into the sufficiency of the second and third counts.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Judgment reversed.

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

Related

Sanchez v. Browne
513 N.E.2d 129 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1987)
Winn v. Vogel
103 N.E.2d 673 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1952)
Dever v. Bowers
94 N.E.2d 518 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1950)
Werner v. W. H. Shons Co.
260 Ill. App. 262 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1929)
Toledo & Ohio Central Railway Co. v. Ambach
10 Ohio C.C. 490 (Ohio Circuit Courts, 1895)
Kincaid v. Storz
52 Mo. App. 564 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1893)
Toledo, Wabash & Western Railway Co. v. Williams
77 Ill. 354 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1875)
Hardy v. Adams
48 Ill. 532 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1868)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
14 Ill. 416, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gillilan-v-gray-ill-1853.