Goodwin v. Goodwin

Citations

• 65 Ill. 497

Syllabus

<p>1. Consideration—when necessary to prove. In a suit to recover one year’s interest upon the following instrument, to wit: “ $3000. Aurora, 111., Nov. 7,1867. Due Samuel J. Goodwin, at the time of my decease, three thousand dollars, with interest payable annually, at the rate of six per cent per annum, provided my assets are sufficient, after my decease, to pay my then liabilities, but if not, this note to be delivered up to my ■ heirs or personal representatives. Jeremiah Goodwin: ” Held, that while the instrument was not technically a promissory note, because payable upon a contingency, yet that, so far as the interest was concerned, it was “ an instrument in writing” for the payment of money, and that a recovery of the interest might be had without proof of the consideration of the instrument.</p> <p>3. Change of venue—when refusal works no injjwry. Where the only question in a case was the construction of the instrument sued on, and the court construed the same correctly: Held, that the refusal of a motion for a change of venue, on account of prejudice in the judge, could work no injury.</p>