Case ID: ill-app_201/html/0527-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Goodwin", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Page-Davis Company, Appellant, v. John P. Shaddock, Appellee.
    Gen. No. 21,226.
    (Not to he reported in full.)
    Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John J. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Brknch Appellate Court at the March term, 1915.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 18, 1916.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by Page-Davis Company, a corporation, plaintiff, against John P. Shaddock, defendant, for breach of an alleged contract to pay for a correspondence course of instructions furnished by defendant to plaintiff. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Contracts, § 309
      
      —what are duties of person agreeing to furnish course of instruction. Any one agreeing to furnish a course of instruction, in the absence of a special contract, binds himself to exercise reasonable skill, judgment, ordinary care and diligence m furnishing the instruction.
    2. Contracts, § 387*—when evidence sufficient to sustain judgment in action for breach of contract. In an action by a correspondence school for breach of a contract by a student to pay for a course of instruction, where it appeared, among other things, that students’ answers sent in for correction, were corrected by girls receiving as low as six dollars per week for their services and who possessed but a superficial, if any, knowledge of the subject, held evidence did not justify the setting aside of a judgment for the defendant.
    Richards, Voigt & Darby, for appellant.
    Rothchild & Schaffner, for appellee.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Goodwin

delivered the opinion of the court.