Cooke v. Murphy

Citations

• 70 Ill. 96

Syllabus

<p>1. Consideration—of supplemental contract to pay additional price on building contract. Where the parties engaging to furnish materials and perform certain work in the erection of a building, claimed that they had made a mistake of §500 in the price of the same, and refused to go on and complete the contract, and thereupon the other party agreed to pay §500 in addition to the original contract price, under which the contractors completed the work: Held, that the new and supplemental agreement to pay §500 more was net without consideration, but was valid and binding.</p> <p>2. Same—what is sufficient. One promise is a sufficient consideration to support another, and where a person does an act beneficial to another, or agrees to do so, that forms a sufficient consideration to support an agreement to pay for the same.</p> <p>3. Contract—written, may be changed, by a subsequent verbal one. A sealed building contract may be changed by a subsequent verbal agreement to payan additional sum for the same work and materials mentioned in the original, and if the work is done under the same, it will be binding.</p> <p>4. Same—whether subsequent verbal contract abrogates prior written one. Where a written building contract is subsequently changed, by parol, only as to the consideration to be paid for the work, when completed, increasing the sum, this will not' be an abandonment of the written contract, but it will remain in force, except as to the price to be paid.</p> <p>5. New trial—on ground of mistake by witness in his testimony. Before a new trial is granted on the ground that a witpess of a party was mistaken in his testimony given, and, on a new trial, will correct the same, the party must show that he has been active and diligent to avert the injury he is about to sustain by the mistake of the witness, and if the mistake could have been demonstrated, and the correction made before the close of the trial, a new trial will be properly refused.</p>