Illinois Smelting & Refining Co. v. Horton

Appellate Court of Illinois

Illinois Smelting & Refining Co. v. Horton

197 Ill. App. 451, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 555

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedJanuary 17, 1916

DocketGen. No. 20,472

StatusPublished

This text of 197 Ill. App. 451 (Illinois Smelting & Refining Co. v. Horton) 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

Illinois Smelting & Refining Co. v. Horton, 197 Ill. App. 451, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 555 (Ill. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice MoSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1: Accord and satisfaction, § 4*—what constitutes where claim, disputed. Where there is a dispute as to the weight of metal sold and the parties agree that the seller shall weigh up the metal and that the purchaser shall make payment at once on the basis of the weight thus ascertained, and, after the metal is correctly weighed, a bill is presented in which a shortage of weight is deducted, and a.check given in payment therefor is accepted, there is an accord and satisfaction so as to preclude a recovery for an alleged balance. 2. Payment, § 29*—when evidence sufficient to establish payment of disputed claim. In an action to recover an alleged balance for metal sold where it appeared that there was a dispute as to the weight, and there was undisputed evidence that the plaintiff carefully weighed and checked the metal, pursuant to an agreement of the parties, held that the evidence was sufficient to establish payment for all metal that had been delivered.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice MoSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1: Accord and satisfaction, § 4*—what constitutes where claim, disputed. Where there is a dispute as to the weight of metal sold and the parties agree that the seller shall weigh up the metal and that the purchaser shall make payment at once on the basis of the weight thus ascertained, and, after the metal is correctly weighed, a bill is presented in which a shortage of weight is deducted, and a.check given in payment therefor is accepted, there is an accord and satisfaction so as to preclude a recovery for an alleged balance. 2. Payment, § 29*—when evidence sufficient to establish payment of disputed claim. In an action to recover an alleged balance for metal sold where it appeared that there was a dispute as to the weight, and there was undisputed evidence that the plaintiff carefully weighed and checked the metal, pursuant to an agreement of the parties, held that the evidence was sufficient to establish payment for all metal that had been delivered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 Ill. App. 451, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 555, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/illinois-smelting-refining-co-v-horton-illappct-1916.