Hulshizer v. Lamoreux

Illinois Supreme Court

Hulshizer v. Lamoreux

58 Ill. 72

CourtIllinois Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 15, 1871

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 58 Ill. 72 (Hulshizer v. Lamoreux) 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

Hulshizer v. Lamoreux, 58 Ill. 72 (Ill. 1871).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Appellant’s special plea disclosed a good defense. We see no distinction between this case and Berger et al. v. Potter et al. 32 Ill. 70. Here, as there, appellees could have asked the aid of a court of chancery to make a deed to appellant, and on. making it, the right to recover on the note would be unquestionable, A title to the lot was the only consideration for the note, and until that title was made, which appellees could not make without the aid of chancery, the note should not he paid.

The judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded.

Judgment reversed.

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

Per Curiam:

Appellant’s special plea disclosed a good defense. We see no distinction between this case and Berger et al. v. Potter et al. 32 Ill. 70. Here, as there, appellees could have asked the aid of a court of chancery to make a deed to appellant, and on. making it, the right to recover on the note would be unquestionable, A title to the lot was the only consideration for the note, and until that title was made, which appellees could not make without the aid of chancery, the note should not he paid.

The judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded.

Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 Ill. 72, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hulshizer-v-lamoreux-ill-1871.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack