Hunt v. Mewis
Hunt v. Mewis
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiffs are wholesale merchants in Chicago, and the defendant is the proprietor of a retail store at Wisner and also at Pierce, in this state. This action is brought to recover a balance due for goods sold and delivered by the plaintiffs to the defendant. The defendant plead a set-off, and on the trial of the cause, a jury being waived, the court found the issues in his favor, and rendered judgment on the set-off for the sum of $38.23. The principal error relied upon is, that the judgment is not supported by the evidence. The testimony shows that the indebtedness was incurred in the year 1880. An itemized bill of the goods sold is set out in an exhibit attached to the deposition of one of the plaintiff’s witnesses. That these goods were bought and received by the defendant is not seriously questioned, but it is claimed that they were received at the Wisner store and not at the one at Pierce. In November, 1881, the defendant wrote to the plaintiffs’ traveling salesman that the plaintiffs “have commenced suit against me on an itemized bill of goods I bought for the Pierce store, where I hold my receipts showing full payment on all accounts.
Judgment accordingly.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- A. L. Hunt, in error v. H. R. Mewis, in error
- Status
- Published