McCabe v. Crosier

69 Ill. 501
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 1873
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 69 Ill. 501 (McCabe v. Crosier) 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
McCabe v. Crosier, 69 Ill. 501 (Ill. 1873).

Opinion

Mr. Justice McAllister

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was a bill by appellant for specific performance of a contract, made by him with appellee, for the purchase of a small parcel of land of little value, and on which no improvements, beyond a short line of fence, had been made. It is the settled doctrine of this court, as of most other courts of equitable cognizance, that a party can not call, as of right, upon a court of equity to exercise that branch of its jurisdiction ; that its exercise rests in the sound discretion of the court, in view of the terms of the contract of the parties and the surrounding circumstances. A party demanding its exercise is bound to show that he himself has always been ready, willing and eager to perform on his part, even when the contract does not make time of the essence of the contract. Phillips v. Ill. Cen. R. R. Co. 63 Ill. 468.

There is not the slightest basis in the evidence in this case for an inference that this appellant has at any time been ready, willing or eager to perform the contract in question. He did not perform, and his position was, that he could do just as he pleased in that regard. Under these circumstances, and after great laches, unexplained by equitable circumstances, it would be against the established principles of the court to decree specific performance. Nor do we perceive any error in the decree in other respects.

It will, therefore, be affirmed.

Decree affirmed.

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

Related

Jacksonville Hotel Building Corp. v. Dunlap Hotel Co.
264 Ill. App. 279 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1931)
Koch v. Streuter
83 N.E. 1072 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1908)
East St. Louis Connecting Railway Co. v. City of East St. Louis
81 Ill. App. 109 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1899)
State v. Des Moines & Ft. Dodge Railway Co.
84 Iowa 419 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1892)
Chicago Municipal Gas Light & Fuel Co. v. Town of Lake
130 Ill. 42 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1889)
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Reno
113 Ill. 39 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1885)
Beach v. Dyer
93 Ill. 295 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1879)
Chicago & Alton Railroad v. Schœneman
90 Ill. 258 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1878)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
69 Ill. 501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccabe-v-crosier-ill-1873.