#### Richmond-Smith Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. William J. Richardson, Defendant in Error.

Gen. No. 18,550.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Harry Olson,Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.

Reversed and judgment here.

Opinion filed November 4, 1913.

*205Abstract of the Decision.

1. Sales, § 15 * —when contract of sale not void for want of mutuality. A contract for the sale of milk consisting of a written order signed by two persons requesting seller to ship milk daily to one of the two, the schedule of price being given and there being incorporated an agreement to receive the milk during a certain period of time, held not void for want of mutuality."

2. Appeal and error, § 367 * —when defenses not reviewable. Defenses alleged in affidavit of merits not relied upon at the trial cannot be considered.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Richmond-Smith Company, a corporation, against William J. Richardson and Mat Anderson to recover for milk sold and delivered to defendants by plaintiff. Service was had only on William J. Richardson. From a judgment in favor of William J. Richardson, plaintiff brings error.

William A. Bowles and James E. Bowles, for plaintiff in error; William L. Hart, of counsel.

Jones, Bryant, Keener, Ring & Posvic, for defendant in error.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XIV, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice Clark

delivered the opinion of the court.