Case ID: ill-app_195/html/0156-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Pam", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Joseph Fekete, Plaintiff in Error, v. Arthur Nowak, Defendant in Error.
    Gen. No. 20,522.
    (Not to he reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    Contracts, g 387
      
      —token breach of contract not shown. Where a lessor of premises used for a saloon entered into a contract with the lessee by which the lessee was to buy beer from the lessor provided that “fifty per cent, of other popular brands of bottled beer” might be sold by the lessee, and such lessor claimed that there was a breach of the contract and offered to prove that the lessee had not purchased bottled beer from the lessor for two months, such offer of evidence was insufficient to show a breach of the contract, since the lessee might have had sufficient beer on hand or might not have sold bottled beer.
    
      Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. C. H. Bowles, Judge, presiding.
    Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1914.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 6, 1915.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action of forcible entry and detainer brought in the Municipal Court of Chicago by Joseph Fekete against Arthur Nowak, to recover possession of premises occupied as a saloon, known as No. 1959 West Grand avenue, Chicago. While the defendant and one Balazs were joined as defendants in the summons and both served, the defendant alone entered an appearance and the case proceeded to trial against him. On the trial below, the jury, under an instruction by the court, returned a verdict finding the defendant not guilty, upon which verdict judgment was entered against the plaintiff for costs, to reverse which the plaintiff has sued out this writ of error.
    Aaron Soble, for plaintiff in error.
    Max Luster, for defendant in error; J. Ambrose Gearon, of counsel.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Pam

delivered the opinion of the court.