Ewing v. Sandoval Coal & Mining Co.
Citations
- 110 Ill. 290
Syllabus
<p>1. Allegations and proofs—must correspond. As a general rule, in equity the proofs and allegations of the bill must correspond, and a party will not be entitled to relief, although the evidence may establish a clear case in his favor, unless there are averments in the bill to support the case made.</p> <p>2. Parol evidence—to show mistake in a written instrument. Parol evidence is admissible on a bill in equity to reform a written contract on the ground of mistake, to establish the fact of there being a mistake; and such cases, like cases of fraud, form an exception to the general rule, which excludes parol evidence to vary written contracts.</p> <p>3. Mistake—of the quantum of evidence. A deed or other instrument of writing should not be reformed for mistake unless the evidence of it is clear and positive. The mistake must be clearly made out by satisfactory proofs.</p> <p>4. Grant of right to mine and remove coal—of rights incident thereto —relief in chancery without special prayer. A deed giving the grantee the right to mine, excavate and remove coal under a. certain tract of land, carries witi it, as an incident, the right to go upon the land and dig for coal, or to sink a coal shaft. And it is not necessary that a bill to reform a deed conveying such right to mine coal, for a mistake in the description of the land, should contain a special prayer for a decree authorizing the grantee to go upon the land. The deed, when corrected, confers this right of itself.</p>
Judges: Craig
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.