Nyquist v. Martin

Appellate Court of Illinois

Nyquist v. Martin

35 Ill. App. 623, 1890 Ill. App. LEXIS 43

DecidedMay 28, 1890

StatusPublished

This text of 35 Ill. App. 623 (Nyquist v. Martin) 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

Nyquist v. Martin, 35 Ill. App. 623, 1890 Ill. App. LEXIS 43 (Ill. Ct. App. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This appeal is brought to review a judgment rendered in favor of appellee and against appellant for the sum of 860, for rent due under a lease. It is first contended that the lease was not delivered, and while there is some conflict of evidence on this point, an examination of the record convinces us that the evidence not only supports the finding of the court that the lease was delivered, but fully preponderates in favor of such conclusion.

The next contention is that because of a mistake in writing the lease, it is made to end April 30,1808, instead of 1888, and so there can be no recovery upon it. There is some ambiguity caused by the writing of the figure “ 8 ” instead of the word “ eighty ” before the word “ eight,” but we are of opinion that no violence is done to the writing by reading it 1888.

The objection is the merest technicality, and is invoked to work an injustice. There is no merit in the appeal and the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

This appeal is brought to review a judgment rendered in favor of appellee and against appellant for the sum of 860, for rent due under a lease. It is first contended that the lease was not delivered, and while there is some conflict of evidence on this point, an examination of the record convinces us that the evidence not only supports the finding of the court that the lease was delivered, but fully preponderates in favor of such conclusion.

The next contention is that because of a mistake in writing the lease, it is made to end April 30,1808, instead of 1888, and so there can be no recovery upon it. There is some ambiguity caused by the writing of the figure “ 8 ” instead of the word “ eighty ” before the word “ eight,” but we are of opinion that no violence is done to the writing by reading it 1888.

The objection is the merest technicality, and is invoked to work an injustice. There is no merit in the appeal and the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 Ill. App. 623, 1890 Ill. App. LEXIS 43, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nyquist-v-martin-illappct-1890.