Ward v. Redden

39 Ill. App. 643, 1890 Ill. App. LEXIS 539
Appellate Court of Illinois·Decided June 12, 1891·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Wall, J.

This was an action of assumpsit to recover a sum of money paid by plaintiff as surety on a promissory note for defendant.

The statute of limitations, five years, was interposed as a defense, to which the plaintiff replied that the defendant had promised anew within five years.

The verdict was for the plaintiff for $160, and judgment was rendered accordingly.

We have carefully examined the evidence and are of opinion that it wholly fails to establish a new promise. Applying the rule as laid down in this State, we think the judgment should have been for defendant. Keener v. Crull, 19 Ill. 191; Carroll v. Forsyth, 69 Ill. 127; Wachter v. Albee, 80 Ill. 47; Haywood v. Gunn, 4 Ill. App. 161.

_The judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Ward v. Redden, 39 Ill. App. 643, 1890 Ill. App. LEXIS 539 (Ill. Ct. App. 1891).

39 Ill. App. 643 (Ward v. Redden) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Beauman v. Simmons
213 Ill. App. 482 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1919)