KIMEN
v.
ATLAS EXCHANGE NATIONAL BANK OF CHICAGO
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In November 1929, Kimen purchased mortgage bonds from Atlas Exchange National Bank with an agreement that the bank would repurchase them at maturity, and Kimen sued for breach of that repurchase contract. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's judgment for Kimen, applying the same legal reasoning established in the companion case Awotin v. Atlas Exchange National Bank decided the same day.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice Stone delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case, which comes here on certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, is a companion case to Awotin v. Atlas Exchange National Bank of Chicago, decided this day, ante, p. 209.
On November 2, 1929, petitioner purchased of respondent, a national banking association, four $1,000 mortgage bonds of the First National Company Collateral Trust. As an inducement and consideration for the purchase, the respondent agreed to repurchase the bonds at their maturity, at par and accrued interest. In a suit brought by petitioner, to recover for breach of the contract and in general assumpsit to recover the purchase price of the bonds, the trial court gave judgment for petitioner, which was reversed by the Appellate Court, 275 Ill. App. 638 (opinion not reported), following its decision in Awotin v. Atlas Exchange National Bank, supra. The Supreme Court of the State denied leave to appeal. The issues raised are the same as those in the Awotin case. For the reasons stated in our opinion in that case, the judgment is
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
A. C. Frost & Co. v. Coeur D'Alene Mines Corp., 312 U.S. 38 (U.S. 1941)…or is detrimental to the public good. If it definitely appears that enforcement of a contract will not be followed by injurious results, generally, at least, what the parties have agreed to ought not to be struck down. Kimen v. Atlas Exchange Bank, 295 U. S. 215 and Dietrick v. Greaney, 309 U. S. 190, pointed out that whether a contract shall be enforced required consideration of the broad purposes of relevant statutes and the [*45] probable effect upon this. In both causes the end which Congress intended t…