Case ID: ill-app_200/html/0136-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Dibell", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Frances Mertel, Defendant in Error, v. Charles F. Walter, Plaintiff in Error.
    Gen. No. 6,191.
    (Not to he reported in full.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of La Salle county; the Hon. Edgab Eldeedge, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1915.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed February 8, 1916.
    Rehearing denied April 6,1916.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by Frances Mertel, plaintiff, against Charles F. Walter, defendant, to recover earnest money paid in pursuance of an alleged contract for the purchase of real estate, which was finally abandoned. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.
    Charles Helmig and Butters & Clark, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Contracts, § 205
      
      —when question of what constitutes for court. The question whether all the letters relative to the sale and purchase of real estate constitute a complete contract is for the court.
    2. Contracts, § 44*—when there is no meeting of minds so as to constitute. There is no meeting of the minds of parties to negotiations for the purchase of real estate so as to constitute a contract where an offer to purchase by letter accompanied by a payment of a certain sum' is met by the introduction of new conditions which are not accepted by the purchaser, and the latter also in a subsequent letter introduces new conditions which the vendor does not accept, but requests a verbal conference, which is agreed to by the purchaser, but the latter, without the holding of any conference, demands the return of the earnest money.
    Scanlan & Massieon, for defendant in error.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Presiding Justice Dibell

delivered the opinion of the court.