Pemberton v. Williams

Citations

• 87 Ill. 15

Syllabus

<p>1. Practice—instructing jury to find for defendant. Where the evidence tends to show that a plaintiff was compelled to pay more than was due on a purchase of land to procure a deed, and that he was induced to do so in order to complete an advantageous sale by him to another of the land, the latter purchaser being urgent to know that the plaintiff had a right to sell, it was held, in a suit to recover back the money paid in excess of what was due, that it was error for the court to instruct the jury the law was with the defendant, and to find for the defendant, as invading the rightful province of the jury.* </p> <p>2. Payment—when recoverable back. Where the assignee of a purchaser of land, who has contracted to sell the land to another who demands to see his deed therefor, is compelled to pay the original vendor more than is due him, in order to get a deed to satisfy his vendee, and the payment is made under protest, it is a fair question of fact for the jury whether the payment is not involuntary, and made under a sort of moral duress, and if so, the excess above the real sum due may be recovered back in assumpsit under the common counts.</p>