Ely v. Ely

Citations

• 80 Ill. 532

Syllabus

<p>1. Contract—later one supersedes former. It is a general rule of evidence that a written contract executed between parties supersedes all their prior negotiations and agreements upon the same subject, except when the last contract covers only a part of the subjects embraced in the prior one, and it plainly appears, from the character of the contracts, that the last one was not intended to be in performance or supersedure of the former one, and that the provisions in the former, not mentioned in the latter, were intended to remain unaffected.</p> <p>3. Where a writing was given by a party agreeing to lease premises and to pay taxes and insurance on the same, and shortly afterwards a formal lease was executed, in which the lessor made no covenants to pay taxes or insurance, but which, with another writing, showed that it related to the same subject, it was held, that the last written agreement must govern as expressing the final contract of the parties, and the first was inoperative.</p> <p>3. Same—of lessor to contribute to expense of rebuilding after loss by fire. Where leased premises were destroyed by fire during the term, the lessee having covenanted to yield possession in the same condition he received the same, and, being about to rebuild, the lessor promised to pay him, as the work progressed, a sum equal to the insurance received thereon, provided the work should be done under the supervision of a particular architect, and the new building should exceed in value the old one by that sum, he will be under no obligation to pay the sum agreed unless the conditions have been complied with in all substantial respects.</p> <p>4. Landlord and tenant—right of tenant to insurance paid landlord. Where a tenant, by the covenants in his lease, is bound to rebuild in case of loss by fire, and the landlord’s wife, as owner of the property', insures the same, and the tenant refuses to pay the premium, and after a loss by fire voluntarily rebuilds, he will not have any con