Grant v. Green

Citations

• 46 Ill. 469

Syllabus

<p>1. Rescission of Contracts—of non-performance. Where a party contracted to construct and equip a railroad, and received, on the hypothecated bonds of the road, as much money as he had expended in and about the contract, and afterward abandoned it, the court may decree the contract, as to such party, rescinded, and re-vest the original stockholders with their stock and franchises yielded to the defaulting contractor, such party, by non-performance, having lost his rights under the contract, and having received all the money he had expended in pursuance of his obligations under the contract, could not then claim to be placed in stain quo.</p> <p>2. Same—as to innocent holders of bonds. But the default of the contractor to construct and equip the road, although it would justify a rescission of the contract as to him, such rescission could not operate to impair or affect the rights of an innocent holder of the bonds.</p>