#### Louis Goldstein, Defendant in Error, v. Domonick Marubio and James L. Morris, Plaintiffs in Error.

Gen. No. 22,058.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

Sales, § 91 * —What constitutes rescission of sale and acquiescence therein. In an action of replevin against two defendants for possession of a certain wagon which one defendant had sold to the plaintiff, and upon plaintiff’s failure to complete payment for same had taken possession thereof, and nine or ten months later had sold and delivered the wagon to his codefendant, who had no knowledge of any claim thereto by the plaintiff, held that there was a rescission of the sale to plaintiff in which he acquiesced, and that he was consequently not entitled to maintain the action.

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Stele, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1916.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

Opinion filed March 20, 1917.

Statement of the Case.

Action of replevin by Louis Goldstein, plaintiff, against Domonick Marubio and James L. Morris, defendants, to recover a certain wagon. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants bring error.

D. K. Cochrane, for plaintiffs in error.

Morris Kompel, for defendant in error.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice McGoorty

delivered the opinion of the court.