Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

30 Ill. App. 85

Haynes v. Mason

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided January 16, 1889

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1889-01-16

Elliott Anthony, Judge, presiding. This action was brought to recover against appellant for a balance of salary claimed to be due to appellee under a contract of employment for the period of one year.

Relies on Curtis v. Sage · William Butcher Steel Works v. Atkinson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1889-01-16

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently July 1977

3 state decisions

101889189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 →

Moran, J.

¶1From the evidence set out in the statement of facts, which is all the evidence contained in the record on the subject, we think it very clear that the contract of appellee was one entered into on March 26, 1885, to work for appellant for one year, the year to commence on Monday, March 30, 1885..

¶2The contract, by its terms, was not to be performed within the space of one year from the making thereof, and, not being in writing, it is within the first section of the statute of frauds. Butcher Steel Works v. Atkinson, 68 Ill. 421; Curtis v. Sage, 35 Ill. 22.

¶3We think the court was correct in refusing to charge appellee with the accounts claimed by appellant against her on the alleged guaranty, but for the error in allowing to her the salary for the balance of the' year which would have been justly hers if her contract had been one valid in law, the j udgment must be reversed and the case remanded.

¶4Reversed and remanded.

/30/illapp/85 · .json · Public domain