Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Reno

Citations

• 113 Ill. 39
• 1885 Ill. LEXIS 662

Syllabus

<p>1. Specific pebfobmance—whether it will be decreed—generally. A bill for the specific performance of a contract is addressed to the sound discretion of the court, and that relief will not be granted as a matter of course, although a legal contract may be shown to exist. The contract must be founded on a good consideration, and be reasonable, fair and just, and it must not be inequitable, or interfere with the public interest to enforce the same.</p> <p>2. A specific performance of a contract will be decreed when it is apparent, from a view of all the circumstances of the case, that it will subserve the ends of justice; and it will be withheld when, from a like view, it appears it will produce hardship or injustice to either of the parties.</p> <p>3. Same—where there is a remedy at law—the public interests to be considered. The owner of premises used for a coal and lumber yard, made a bond for a deed of a part of such premises to a railway company, which provided that the company should “restore all the switch connections then existing” between the railroad and the yards of the vendor, and he afterward conveyed the part so sold, by a deed without any conditions, under which other railway companies acquired title, and laid tracks, over which all passenger and freight trains of several roads passed, and it appeared that to restore the switch connections as before would be detrimental to the business of the roads and to the public interests, and that there was a track laid alongside of the yard, and a connection with it was offered. It was held, that as the vendor had an adequate remedy at law for the breach of the contract, and to enforce the same specifically would produce great hardship and burden upon the railroad companies, and affect injuriously the public interests, a specific performance should not be decreed.</p>