Deland v. Amesbury Woollen & Cotton Manufacturing Co.
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
- Brundage v. Gottschalk (Ill. App. Ct. 1932)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The release is absolute and unequivocal in its terms, and it cannot be explained by parol evidence. If it was the intention of the plaintiff to except this note from the release, it should have been so expressed in the indenture ; and if that had been done, possibly Ward would have refused to assign his property. Ward is discharged from the note, and that destroys the plaintiff’s right of action against the defendants, unless he can show that they authorized him to give the discharge.
Verdict set aside
As to the effect of a factor’s taking a note payable to himself, see 2 Kent (3d ed.) 622; Hosmer v. Beebe, 14 Martin, (Louis.) 368.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.