Fitzgerald v. Staples

Citations

• 88 Ill. 234

Syllabus

<p>1. Contract—construction. A court of law has no right to presume contracting parties intended to insert in a written contract a provision other or different from that which the plain language used would indicate, and then give a construction to the contract which would only be legitimate if the contract contained the supposed omitted provision.</p> <p>2. Bond—when void for want of condition. A bond which recites that the principal obligor has made a contract with the obligee to receive from the latter certain teas and coffees, sell the same, pay over to the obligee the proceeds of sales, less the profits of the obligor, each month, and make complete settlement each thirty days, and, without any condition being expressed, concludes, “ then this obligation shall be void,” etc., creates no liability on the part of those executing the same.</p>