Case ID: ill-app_184/html/0575-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Fitch", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Greer-Wilkinson Lumber Company, Defendant in Error, v. George A. Neeves, Plaintiff in Error.
    Gen. No. 18,726.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Frederick L. Fake, Jr., Judge, presiding.
    Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed January 22, 1914.
    Rehearing denied February 3, 1914.
    
      Abstract of the Decision.
    Compromise and settlement, § 5
      
      —when compromise of disputed claim sufficient consideration for a note. Where a person as a result of a compromise agreement gives his promissory note in settlement of a doubtful claim he is liable thereon and cannot urge want of consideration for the note, even though the claim could not have been legally enforced against him, where there was neither actual nor constructive fraud and the parties acted in good faith with full knowledge of all the facts.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by Greer-Wilkinson Lumber Company, a corporation, against George A. Neeves on a promissory note given by defendant to plaintiff in renewal of another note for the same amount. The original note was given to plaintiff as a result of a compromise agreement in payment for materials purchased by a contractor and used by the contractor in constructing a house for defendant after defendant had disputed his liability to pay therefor, and after defendant had refused to pay the contractor on the ground that the building did not conform to specifications. The defense to the note was want of consideration. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff for $586.15, defendant brings error.
    George A. Neeves, Jr. and Leland K. Neeves, for plaintiff in error.
    Eastman & White, for defendant in error; Ralph R. Hawxhurst, of counsel.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Presiding Justice Fitch

delivered the opinion of the court.