Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

25 Ill. 105

Clark v. Lyons

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1860

Illinois Supreme Court · decided 1860-11-15

This was a bill in chancery, filed by defendant in error. The bill alleges that in 1851, J. Sloan purchased from one Treat, the land in dispute, for $75, of which $50 was paid.

Relies on Glover v. Fisher

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1860-11-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1928

5 state decisions

101860187018801890190019101920decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Breese, J.

¶1We are well satisfied that time was not of the essence of this contract, and therefore a failure to pay on the day did not forfeit the contract. Mason v. Caldwell, 5 Gilm. 196. The doctrine of equity is compensation and not forfeiture, as we have repeatedly declared. Glover v. Fisher et al., 11 Ill. 666 ; Morgan et al. v. Herrick, Adm'r, et al., 21 ib. 497.

¶2It is discretionary with courts to enforce or not such contracts, as the attending circumstances may warrant. We see nothing in the case to justify the inference that the delay which did come in the payment of the money, arose out of a desire to repudiate the contract or procrastinate the payment. The complainant seems to have acted in good faith, and a rigid forfeiture should not be exacted.

¶3The defendant covenanted to make a sufficient conveyance of the land, and a deed with a covenant of general warranty is such a conveyance.

¶4The decree must be affirmed. Decree affirmed.

/25/ill/105 · .json · Public domain