Long v. Conklin

Citations

• 75 Ill. 32

Syllabus

<p>1. Pleading and proof — as to date of contract. Where the day of making a contract is laid under a videlicet, it need not be ■ proved as laid, and the fact of there being an issue upon a plea that the contract set forth is void under the statute of frauds in not being by its terms to be performed within one year, will not vary the rule.</p> <p>2. Contract —measure of damages. A contract to deliver to the plaintiffs what wood they would need in their business and as they should require it, is a continuing contract and is not avoided by a refusal in the early part of the season, and in such a case the plaintiffs will have the right to buy wood at the different times when needed for use, and will not be restricted,in a suit for breach of the contract, to the difference in the price of wood at the time of the repudiation of the contract and the contract price, unless it be shown there was a possibility of their making a similar contract as to the time of delivery.</p> <p>3. Evidence — book-keeper, as to facts shown by books. In a suit where it became material to show the amount of wood purchased by the plaintiffs and the prices paid, it was held not erroneous to permit the plaintiffs’ bookkeeper to testify to the facts, although he did not make the purchases, he testifying that he knew of the purchases and that he kept the books, one of which he produced on the trial.</p>