Shackelton v. Lawrence

Citations

• 65 Ill. 175

Syllabus

<p>1. Warranty—instruction as to effect of representation. Upon the trial of an issue on a plea of failure of consideration, arising from a breach of warranty by the plaintiif as to the quantity of land sold in growing crops, the court told the jury, in an instruction, that if the assertions of the plaintiff were the expression of the judgment, opinion or belief of the plaintiff, and the crops were open to inspection, and the defendants might, by ordinary prudence, have discovered the amount of the crops, such assertions, although untrue, were no defense: Held, that the instruction was too broad. It should have been that, if the statements of the plaintiff were made only as a matter of opinion, and not as a representation of a fact upon which the defendants could rely, and made as an inducement to the purchase; and if, further, the parties had equal means of information as to the truth of the assertion, then the defense would fail.</p> <p>2. Same—instruction based on wrong theory. Where the issue being tried was whether certain representations made upon a sale constituted a warranty, and if so, whether it was broken, an instruction based upon the theory that the issue was one of fraud, was held erroneous, as necessarily tending to mislead the jury.</p>