(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Illinois Appellate Court Unpublished Opinions: first series"

If:' 



'^iWCf*;.li'.>)'>»'''''':»:- 



3^: 



*>*«:. 




.^'OC 



I'.N''. 





a v I a 






Digitized by tine Internet Arciiive 

in 2010 witii funding from 

CARLI: Consortium of Academic and Researcii Libraries in Illinois 



http://www.archive.org/details/illinoisappellat200illi 






MH* Jlir^TIO:""; d»CCiHS(m (i*>ll.v«i^d tH© «plni^-;ii of 
th«? 0€>urt« 

&&pi^ll0& |43«I8«?0, a£»p«3,l«b«t |»irosiecu%06 tMii& tjt|»p«ai« 



,> 



Apiiellmsfc fis^st csoat«*:i«i» th&t tlm proof tioesi act 
sustsnia tiif; ijmt«ri«kl, 8ll«g®,tio»ifi of ttae Mil; timi thero 
i3 a rarljiH'0# l9®tw®i"i!ii &l,,l©g&tioia« of the bill on tfe*-» ©oe 
hafiti iod tl»«:? fia«44i!9igi» ».f tn^ f/ija^ter &nd dssisrfeet of tii>.«r eourt 
eti th@oth«)f, ami %im% tiiie imriimee violatae Uik? el ctsaontaiir 
rule titat tJae «3,leiji8.tionfi of tJie bill* th«ft proof, nnd %iv^ 
ci#(ir9e mist oorrespoMt siM- thrr^foj e acn«titut«« rcversitilo 
error* it 1» arig»e4 that Dm priuoipal aasateri^l aXl^gatioo 
of th« bill wa© tk«i fraudia«»nt reprtrattittsttioia aitd* by fApp«il» 
aat to th& lea^pmllmt %im% irue poultry mm ttriioliy cicetroyed aiw 
that h» diBCOverod tui« after tiie ««tti«amist h^r^inftftor men- 
tiojaed, &mi tiisst tJaoro i» no proof to »w&t»ia thi» aJLiegatlon, 
ana r»o »uoh flt»iln«; Aa U»« »*eter«« roi^rt or in tbe a«or««» 

Ai,>p«lla!jt Wi8 enifae:«<l la t>i« jntMie war«hou»« 
i^nd ooXd »t#rfi>@<» hu0inot&», r^r^ ufipetXltse in the larholooale 
produco ana oo33si?.iowion bu8in«Bc# d^ftlitig prinoipsilly in 
|K)ultry« i^rior to Maroh 19, 1911, ttp|>olie« delivered t» 




iS? 



BOUND. 



JAN 1 1 ^"62 



K ^irx<&^ ^/ 



•2» 

Uie myi^mllant for stttiram;* «eraim3fM5i!»« «j<j»«l»ting elUofly 

of p©uitr/# of tiK'! v«iii«« ef taore tto*K> |J*1»0CJC» iiii«ii the 

cmt» wh<*riai« *Jie »p,.«?Xl«.at «*g-?««^ to iasjure tue poultry 
f©r tilt'! fi.iil ^kssfouat. ©f sKuai'i irsiiurs3*vs«* <j«!rtlfiettte, ihe 

for «*|jip*il.l«« It* tM <5f?3iIXt^?ti^3Sli s»f the ijiit«5?iiil«Sr. C>tj mJs,M 

45.1 5**l»«t 'fliw4*«lt"9ft»### tJMs m>%^B B4JcfrP*s3a-'^4*5S ^12133, s*,£i4 tJi»*r# 
W'^s flt furtl^"?!- ifiKl«X^t#i*jriiMaii^ #f ^41?li*4i.i, in mi^oii 19, 1911. » 

7 &«or^ ^n4 hi^^^mn% ^m-iliiU^^t> M fh^- tU^ %ii£;Ti\ warn i^tered 
in Ui^' ^^i^wmhmxn^ Z^^^O^^IO pmm^& uf butter «*'ui I,c33g960 
jw)uii!4ats of poiiltyy, feelon^ljig t© 4i'fi"«jr«?at p®2*«€fns i?*«lu«3liii; 
fiii?p«l.l«©» A3.i of tJ4« ixjuitry &>nd lm%%sf w^o «u<»tirey«4 or 
4ajaa^«(t; 1^ fir«^ tm4 -«mt«r» m;^ i%.^p«llaiat p]roo«o4<&<^ t£i jE^^Jufit 
%hM !««» wit-h 'U<i@ ifsmitra.:.ce euoi^alJies* ^)p0ll«« was dJkt^w 
eati»fi«4 with tS5i» |»T©j>e8»<J «4J|u«5iaiif-nt ami ©sspleysMil «n ia» 
8Ui*«uio*) s»44'ii»Si«5."| <5tpu«llftni «.!«« ««tp.:©y®s$ «.n adjueter. the 
«dju«it:.i«n';- -^ae csarrieti t>a a«c; mi »^r©<5S!!ai»«t r@«ohfi«i -^i th the 
i»»ur«mci» ct«i®p«*nio«i \ii/ ttie api^ellsmt aloae# *h« i»sumtto« 
i3olle^Ot«>^ <^ti £ij^]y»«tll«Mii*« px'^piirty »mt;ui!it«!>ti tc^ $ll«251c&3« 
As>pell«© ola4«»«t«fa to Uw mu."^i%t Qi th« i»«ttlejsk<mt» bat %fia» 
isjifojiaiMi toy Rippollant tlmt h u&t%lmmn% luttt t»««n «»»d«, anti 
«a AUtjuftt l(i, 1911, tift«T oieuuotiwg th«? «tai««it 4ue iinci ow&x»g 
fx^tfl api>ftll0«, e,|?p«kil«jjt ^<!^i<i ftppf»ll«j!« ^ini^i-ilanee ai^i^aHtiniE 



^Ult^m. 



iif.:C ~' 



'■''•.H't *■ 



,Tt;^?-^^ 



to #211.0«93« miii took & rf^osript wt»lah wi»e *i» fxai »f all 

uos^auy i.iXOt?ij% out of the fire ©f ;ii:xjjroh le^, 1911»* After 

tbe fir»,»^p©ll«« reociYeu frojis ai^pellant ©wrtain of th« 
<ia«iag*»4 poultry but ws^-e uimbl^g i^e 4iepo®e of kill of it aiKJ 

rettarneu the t>ttianc«# Api)«Ilant tHif?n «si»p<J8e<5 of all of 

for 445,899»S6, or an t-iVer«i^e ol" 9#S S!eiit» |>&r i^und* 
ilo r#oor<i wan M^pt !»>' tti^peilsmt frota wiiioli Oim \h3 »»«©«*• 
taiii«<i t}j« pyie«f© imu /asa^s-.ajt rv-e'-ivfeti for a^iijeiloe'* 
dai^E^jetl poultry, 91 #093. ycyuttds of «hi,<;^ wti« i»(3iu4«Hi in tho 

^h« sm«it»r foua4 %lm.t ai?ij«ila»t 'waii li&blt? for 

of 9«;g O0»tii p@$r pouj»l« @r #M35«&?» tl^ie asiouist iM^^d 
to th^ in&urmuioe coll#oie(l ss^4€% a tottil &£acui!it Uuo fta4 
omng frosj a^^i^wHeat tc app«l«« of ^lt»@67«3©» *V,-:«11®« 

vvlUi lnt'^r«et fro» Aug^uet is, 1911 « for ii?)adii isjsdeoueit the 
U«or»« ■»*».** «ut«y@d. 

Appellant ooateadw timX mm 9pi>ell«« ^att 6xperltt»o«ti 
in h&ndl Inu; |K>ult:ry a»«Jt «sad r«!pr«««f}t«d by £in a^l<» f ir« 
in»u2iiu30« a(yut)t«r« tJ}«!! &«ttl«sti«'nt mact« Au.f^uet IC, lv>ll* 
is. 30110106170 «tnu bi«^iz^« tlie cmfit^r foundi t^mt at the 
Itm© of the «x«ou6ion Of the receipt V «tjpp«llee, »b abovo 
»»ntio»««L, ho lw«w tijat all of hits iiror^erty hfe<i not boea 

ttgo4 pouitJTjr aau ii^ul »oia »c?»e of »i>pelleo»« ; tiwit ai>p«li»* 
4ia not know tho ssotvmt of sKiney r* oelv«d by npp«ll«at 



<i'"4)lMI ^ftAJfl- ........ lie** . 






ft».T#» -/ 



*'>-i-'' ^lO 



dLldl not kno« %hm prl&&» &t wiuait H-ffj&XXa.n% «i^as 8«.l'lin£; 
tJw dttrsag^d poultj^r nor the smeuat or j^oaery it yealljKHi 
fro» the aiale cf th« sti*ie| tliat apixftllaat mjver remlered. 

or th« a«^uat of siOj!^<:iy r^-'aeiVis>4 from tli«r £3ilULe of th« ^isam^«A 
jpoultry* [l[Ma flmiii% ie >3«ximtrr«ii In by tho e]im»o«»lloxr an4 

i» ttttpporte^ 19;^ the @7ia«^i»<3<i»^! 

'fix& «sll«p»,tion« of the Mlit sjo fisjf «is faaterlal 
to tlit? point utt4ey oomtid«?'p&ttcjn, w«r« tJiat appellant p«* 
piro8«nt<i4 tJsat all of appellee* o poultry imd bwen {Jefitr»y«4 
t>^ the »ire aas^. tMo ''wi^s di^^stfoieed oaly sSt^T th« eottleK^^ont] 
th»t It aa^u®tfcd ihs i«S8» i*ith the la^urftBC-^i dOfcijjeiKies for 
aor# th@ua |li«OC/0 «^jkd d«auate^ from thin uum iliii^ as-ittunt duo 
»jjpell&ut i^Jfiw, |?a44 astviJ^llee tii« b?.latt«3«; tbiat these re|>r»» 
s^ntatlons w&r& faloo ami f.rau^ulozit E£td ths^ «x|>p«llosit oold 
oa4 ciii35|}Or&o(A of ai^p«lligo*9 Mitsrelmndisso for laioro %lmn #E4,&0(3 
oitci rotisijiea th^iif pjmoesdJK thereof. V/ 

fli« alls^ail»« ttet «,|itpallant falsely r0py»8®nt«s4 

that Rppeli^e®** |jr«i*«rty v»«.s nrhclly liestroyeii and that »pp&l» 

Xoe diooov-g-fftU %'id& "smm vmtrue esil:^/' *ftey the o«ttl«3ssi«snt # is 

net suet&lB^d by tho «!;iri6&nae$ on, tj%@ oontrmry, %h& u»iiisj»ut<Mi 

evi<ie33«e is tlk&.%m^^tXm JteiMMr loitg iWBforo th« eettl«SBse»Bt timt 

not 
hio peultry hJ4si/^«« tot®.lly (i«38troy©^» fso^r^iror* wo lire 

clearly of tii© cpioit^n Umt tMs varlanoo it. tiot of fluch a 

Bubotaatlfil aature a» te* warrant a rav^rssd of Ui& 4#ore®. 

Ap^>olXant 40^8 riOt ;:on%t»d timt there v'&» n& ixll@gatio» in 

tho bill to tnujptport th« findixtg tlmt »j»pelXeo (iici not know 

the cuiswant of iaotumma*.* oolleatad lay 5\]p?«lXRat or the oj&ount 

wiiioii appmllsMt received for ti^e onlvaac* it ie aouoeded tii&t 

appellant &otecl ho trttateo for o,pj;oXlo«»(mci ao euah au0t s^xow 

ti^e utcio&t 0«od e&lt^ Ja tho oottXesonl^ **?rmi8uctiono Itetisoeni ai»art3 



&Ott 

_ Trs 9fr ^'vrf-^Tsr- ,&r.--^•**^^^ ^f;;vj.,* ..^..^N^ ^fi«?-£*fa« »iif 

••'" • ,,,:> ■ 

at Koi.- 



mM en« %»«iriiif^ & fi4ui?i&fy r-^^lation to Mm are ti|>6ii Ms 
fiMjUoo pglEiMfc iMls!t vo;itobi« upon ©rw'umia ©r publl.© policy, 
azt4 tiici IsiurtHon ef prc^f » the; fiducial^ r«I&tiim b«l»g 
««it®.bli8h.»d, ia upvtt tJ;»L« ««« reotsivinu; the- 1>®a©fli tn «hi>w 

Of ©riot-ii^y,, or mMM atU^T .fatsta «*» ^iXi entisfy th«s aourt 
tiwi, tli^ dtmll^iQg' vm.& at a3m*«s X«xigth, cr lu$ mu^t »h0'g;r thx&t 
th.^ "6raa»aoti0it wagi tod its t3a# 8»st p^'i-f «s©t ^©©4 faitSi ©a 

l^m In, :iMtef-y.« 3LM ill, E2d. 



tl'A-ey® a fi4u«ii«iirjf r^Iatioii #xi^t», it is net n«o»» 
^ttimir^r t© «tta.blii^ i»t®«iti©ii5iX ormeta^ frsMrf. in ©rdt^y t© 
««H a»i^« «i eowtrads-l* |.M#^ %%■ "iA\%^P„*, '^'^^ ^^^* *3.3» 

Ap|j>«2.immt ^ppmrssi ta iiust^ts cana«giv04 timt, it had 

®n<l, a|>|)«iia«tt ©««*• tteat »i?p©lXjant -seuia thea disi>©»« of tiie 

»«tl¥fti!:«i aud retain m^' px'ofit it ird#it !>« laljl© to i3&ls»» 

relation 
In tli«3 «&»«» at bsar, th# fi«8;uoi«JP3r/1>*^^ atteittea is, wfi« Hi® 

4uty of til© »it|»i>«li«jat to a4vl»® a|»^eJ,l<9« 0f ti»e ©aount of 

Ana til® »fl!iou»t it Tim» r©<se!i?iii^ for tlja w^lYai^e, It imviris 
fall<stit in tJfiif? retfaM, tii« c^^ujpt properly adt aRide th« 

tt«ttleja'*nt «Ht M*|guet 16 » 1911 « 

A$»i>«>ll&wt aXec <i<mtem*i.o tlmt tb.fi court ers-ftd in 
«rai9ittiae the <ta»>'ant wkioln. «fc|>.p«»lla»t «n&» a«$ar«jiM te p&y 

in tiie j>rio« p«ir poowd alioiiir<*a for th.« 8iilv«4|j« ami tite 
nta»b«r oi ^ouM» th»r«»€if« Uii(Ji'::;r tho facts in this ch^s*. 



iitti:^ >.«a(ifi» ;^<^ «i «« n-d^yml «*w$m 4^^ as£i» ^iit4Mk^ #«C«r smis 

ffo ^^Jl<£'^ i»»«^ ^i&'^'^f #:<Ni& ^M mi hand «#^' i»i»ll*:^#»?' 

, lu mi 4.a^ 



, / 



.«a«VJUw ?uW T«1; ijifii.' . .itfiw 4* ili>«#(i*wW. 



th« burden of «»tAbli«hiilg th«? nimb®r of |>ouniie cl* salvsigA 
%&14 "by «^p'i^9ll.an% m\& ti-t® pirioes r<»a««ive4 tii^'rctoT ime upon 

Hixvliig fftileti i» till IS ^rsfi^ard it amnot no-*»' t»e heard to oon* 

«lo«r«« ©f th& fi-w|»«apiejf -vJoiirt of Cook Geuaty ie afflrm^^tt* 



'* -- ■• tx' .. .,i 



AC 



^i^ ^h'i.iS^m^ wis'' fei 






3S9 • iiiJiii, 

\ 

\ Appall ee» )/ 

\ W AF^IiAL FROM 

Vts, \ n M.miQlif'AU COURT 

\ /■ 200I.AO 

mu JUii'Sian Q^comm «l«llY©rett Uie (.-■pinion ©f 
tha Qpurt* 

• This appeal i© proe«(nit«»d to rev0r»« a Juilfi^«»nt of the 
Municiimi Court of Chiosn© for #531#€^, in favor of App«lle« 
(plaintiff) umi sigaiitust the app«ll-ant (aefendlmit) • Hi© 
parties will hKr«^iimft«?r be d«siBign»if»d plultttiff and d»» 
fendsixit a« ijn tii« oourt b«lew» 



jyXaintiif w®.s the o^aer ©f a 8eri®8 of note© otjgr©* 
gating #8,8CC«0C, whlah wcsare e«eiwf:'«l l»y «, jsaortg?)^© on cer» 
tain l«t.»tie in XhiJ :ita&® of i^iahigwa* The BtMes:ai«rnt of claim 
»ei up a written contract botweeia tis« parties wherwby tiie 
ii«f«?nd«nt» in ooneid«tra.tion of ttoe exten«lon of thn tici© 
Of paysaent of on«t of the tsotott, asiSivm^^d and agrts^^^i to pay 
oaid aoto; the intcr«^et on all of tho i^t''*^ outcstancling 
anu %,h<& taxes for th« year 1913 &n the ^x>r%g&^^ lands. 
Uefendant Iwving d^faultod in the p«>*3«nt of the taxoe and 
tJ!i<(» inttroet en tho tiotet ro»salning uai»ai<l» tl^i:^ suit -ma^p 
ll>rought« 

fho deffdtdant filRd <*n fttffldavlt of aicrito, and 
a «tate«iont of sot off for #I110«0C'« 'I'ha plaintiff thon 
filed an affitlaTit of lacritii to the afendant'e stateaont 
of B«t off# Aftorwardo, on tv tion of the laintiff, th« 
diifonUant^e affitinvit of wftrite and titntmxent of i5«t pff 



*mU' 






■^ t J n y ^ 



.»»«|.i;tsf #«r»«© #4* i5i ^-^ -^-i' 



vore otriokoa froai iae filee, and Ihta dtTenuiint was ^iven 
Xt»kve to file im £iL»«nd»d aSfidarit of asrite and statesient 
©f »«t*off urithia 10 flaye. The «l»f«nid«>.nt aftorwardfl filed 
tax «eiendi»«l affidavit of ;^«rit«« «fhlch «!».i» aXeo 8trick«<n 
fX'Osi the files en tmtUn of %h«i £»I$iixitirf • At the etam* 
tisse thf^ court denied the saotion of the defendant for 
leMTe to file &n ainie7id«4 »Ui.teia«^&t of f$et*off « tmd judf^^'^^nt 
\^ df-ffiiult was ffiiaterRd against the defetniant for th« auaount 
of plaintiff's olains, , 

TtIi® ti«f<«n4«int eontende that thcf court erred in 
striking IUk otat^sieat of eet-off fro id th^ file». 

It iJj a sfuffitslcat i&aevscr to t^UK acntentxon to 
»«i t}^at tjrie jaoti«n t© strike d«'f«nar4nt*® 6tiit«?««nt of 
B«t«»©ff fron tJi« fll«», and tiie oracr of ceuri «at<;!r»<J 
thtti-ecs, are nt(t oontaineU iij tn^j bili of ^ixoepticne* 
Th« jwint is tiot, thf^refortj, pree©rve4 for review. MS^ Sx 
Mntwa,^ £63 ill, 394. I'urtJiersaore, ci«?fm»aant dia aot elect 
to ctj^nd 1»y hijt statement of set«off but a&ked for and waci 
eiven l««Ye tH fi.l« an arj^M«4 6tatemi«nt of &et«eff. Any 
eirror coKsadtteti ««»« v&iyf&A anci h« ©sirinot now be h«?ar<i to 
ooBi|^lel». ^eoor^ii li^pttional li^nk %^ Clancy . 1?8 ill, App. 
^8'S M.^«,fi Xa. ift^\4W4» I'^S iU. /.py, 3aw 

the d«feiitiUint n«xt contc'rtde ti:at th*» ocujrt alaused 
itc dioorctivn in cicnying d«f6naant*a inctson tor leare to 
fil© am amend«<t et&teraent of f80t*»oft« the order of th« oourt 
grnnting the <if f««nd«is.nt l«©vc to file tin aiaeruied Btiitflrracnt of 
8«t*off vituin 10 dftys was entered Cttt<;b0r IC, 19X4, &nd 
there io no cIslIm Umt Any further ext<n»lon of tirae >»ae 
«ver asked for or granted by tht? ooart* On the 16th d^y 



"f- *:^3miM MMiiM. MmMM Mm$^. -■-'■ 

*mjR ,Htih ,im mi .^g^^im.^mUkT^'^^ 



thor^-after, »<OY«ab«r 5, 1914, th»? d*^f«ndj;mt presented 
hie ejsiendQd 6tat«2iS<^nt of net^eft &n<i r^T<»d thi» iscurt 
for leave to fll« the »eu3« lnBt£i>i}t0r« ^o exouao is 
4lffer<^u for the ffitiluro to file the attMmelea Btfit€^.8nt 
witiiln thtf tiaie allotred* W€ sr* tfa"r??forf' cl«'ijrly of 
the cplai' a thttt th re »&» no £ibu«« of difiaretion in 
th*> aeiirt*8 refusing to grajit defeadsnt's iaotion«"^~i 

iiOrsroy«r, we are of the t piaieit tJmt the amentled 
steitmaent of eet-Off tiio jaat ptmn&ni. a aletim pJP©p«*r to b« 
UTiged toy w»y of ««^t-»«ff r7 The it«e»0 8«t f©rth therein sur« 
AS follotvs: K&i^p, care ^n^i feed of on® horee on f&roi 6 
i^otj*, f3C p«r ]:!ito«,$lSCs eare ima feed of 4m<^ (!ClIi« d«(i; 
en ftxTM m>s*, !'!& ptr ;i!io«, |90; at6r«t^« or win«, 9 saots.* 
#30 pi^r 13©., 'j*S4&; tt«« of pnrt of hou»« ano storage ©f 
furniture, 6 ?a?3B», llOO per Ra>« , tSC-Oj t©t«tl, IliCO, ' / 
j S'roja till* it sl<j«jrly h^p^at® limt tii^ alaijs did not arise 
out of the; oontr&ot ssiM. sued u^acn by titt^ >slaAntiff , and 
unlesfi it ie for liquidated dar^tiges, it caaanot be? uris^d 
by way of eet-off, i^ Jiifii^iSfil Jb. M®£. «» ai* SCO; 
IfAS^^^,*^ Xs. ^WSIa ^3.1 ill. 333; i^iiMl £b. ,M^,Afig^ i:£imAM 
Go. 113 Ul. &X2, It is allcfged that th-n plaintiff aooepted 
tli« serrioee performed Vy tl»«? d:<^fm»dauat, but it ie net aCLm 
X«g«d tJ'uftt th© plaintiff ajgreed to pay tli« prie@0 8«t forth 
in th** otateaent of eet-off . ianif'SBtly, th« d«f«nckmt 
v^B «i4»eklng to r<-<}0VQr on »n impliodl contract m)4 could 
XU rfoover only for the r«>a8ona,bl« falue of th^ B«rvice» 
r«nd«:r«d, vhioh was a question to be det^rsjilned fron the 
«vidonoe. Tha olai;a v?ao for unliquidated djjfiiRgeSt f I'^^g'al 
po«tod ^MS£ i£x ifc ^;^;n^^^ I^^T^'^oRf? -^» • ^^^ ^^^ ^^ J 
l^g^fty Bfeue ^ i^. Xfc ii3i£SM.» "^^ ^^^' ^PP* ^''^J Robieon i^. 






4. 

.•ia»4Ut*» «-JUi*.*jr .;«>«i&#: ,.<m .'i^i^ '^v,?:! 4#«ii^'' & ^;rJ«af*i= .»<■• 
,i%m Soa 6i!s. «aii>io w*J 3<*£ta m-a^t^J^ '^%mi^ t'i.4ri«t| *ws?^: 

^i . 'Jrf^ /-JMflJ} fosj^aj:;' iig 01 ♦&«»■ «i4:ifc «M 4^£ 

> 9^ <^ «|c- '.v jSfittf-/ 



«£ 



MMIU « iU. 408; .SteQ^^ !«, iilMa. SO «• 0. A,, 187.) 

«aiti l.«%ir« to fii® it was, •th'-'ri,tf©r©, properly s*«fu©e«i#" ? I 

l}Qt*?Xid&nt n&xt co»ten<ls that hXa ajiaendidd afri* 

4RV'ii of merits «ill«ge<l fttcta i»!hxah cnQastitut^U a a^fenistt to 
plaintiff*^ «^alm« It »et up timt defem<:int wa.0 a mi^re gu&7» 
ftister of til© pairmoiit of th*.^ asv«ral &\mm ep«ioifi<*cl in the 
oo«tr«,<!t «u®4 cm# smd tlruat tim ),;lait3itiff ^lad isatie nc effort 
t© oolX«ot from th« prlsioiiMil. d«l>tor», or r«aliss« tim m^y\mtn 
4,wet out of tli© ««csurityii Wiicsli m^m jaorei than 8uffic5i«5fnt to pay 
til® a<sa&uat rstsiiaiiUis^ yupalti. Th# oontract ^xpreaoly states 
that "©ar. 1» J# aa«41eiy he.r«'by jais.isui®e« mid .8^r«Hiii te pay^ 
th« 6«»v©r^ SMa» thf.'Vf^in wmn%mn&fi»\j€hi& .IxiiajjuEtg© is clear 
and uaasaM^uou®, umi is* «ot ©usoeptiWe of the iMtwrpreta* 
tion put upon it % ths- defcmto^t* The sie»feBa»nt was 
IjrijBaarily li&bl* wrni tine ius3#ade4 ^ffi^airit of aesrita wa» thwr** 
for© @3roi«rly 0ti"i<Jk#« froai tht filfitsj. 

Findiiig mi r^^&rnihlfi «nror ia Vim y«s«rd, th© 
^udgir^ent of the Muiaicijjai Gowrt ©f Sliiesi^e wlli t»® alTiriJusd. 



, a!»4««wt t^mt a»i4ss*»« -^mmu ^MA9&lk *\ .« #-«&*# <»s!» 



}n^^ 



\ 

. , cx«oyif GcoiiT, 

CIU5.400 lUiLlXVS OOMFMT m^^ 

\ /' ^ ^ li 

mu ^iittm U^cmmM dsiivere^ th*? ©piiuoo «f 

Q«,i' io r«i©©v#ap for i>«r®o»ia Injufi*®* A Juslga^wt im& 
A« to tii.« dfjf«»5k«kt«t iiitt^s^iouis© It ^"fere© 0©. For «0!mr®ti-^ 

A 

l««c®» th® i)«trti«» will b# ae»ig««it®d plaiuiiff awe <!«• 
f©«i«l«,itiit8 a« in th« court l>«a,©w» 

liine XS5» 1912 » til® plaintiff mm a im.®fa©»igesr ©a 
«n« of Gaf0ndaitt»» «m.ris w?'ii<.?ia was pr©e^(&«:'4i«i«g; n^rth i» 
W«j.aiiife.rtii «ir©nu«» C>ii©ago. Au the «ar tmi> ©roKSiiig :57 th 
fitr«<Bt it oollidewi with u w«^-©n lea«S«fd with lumber belote®» 
Ing %& tfe© <i«fen4«A»t RliteoJwus© & i:a»br«e \io»» widen wr» 
IE«l»ig «»&0t in 37th j»ti«(' t» The plaintiff i^ft© ©tajiiding on 
Ui« front platfora of ti*e car aiid clai3a» tJi'^i n© ??».« thrown 
With 0re«t f«re«» JiBd iriolwjc* jigstlnst lamrt-fl ^^f th« c«r and 
must tJi^ro'fe^ 9«v»ifaiy injured. 

TiMS 4»fe»<ii!init» flrct contfnd %im% the verdict i« 
ftg»inot th«!i5ia«a,fe»t w«igiit of the. ©viUenoej that tho clear 



■iJWjlJu^Sfe" ** lix •"> ; 



l^fe.-l 



, ivfj--^^!-' .» V »,fc«/» 'HM.SL 



tita^„.tMo^t>. ■I;<5 



'J 






%9 neiatij A .-s^aidr. ,«?:9liE'ii'rl.i£ta# >i' 



»f|^<tii0 -.^ii. 






K7V& an^»9«'«<» <M»^ ^E«^ «>^ *^ ^t%3i&i^Xi imm»-9-^ m^imiSiV** 



.V »il# 4ai# f?m- 



a4rM*<s*»«t'^^ 



>ifj^ jfeft^'i^. 



w«tgiit e.f th<? «Tid?.f}»ae iihnr,ti tJ;w-it tb« oolUfilvn ©.f tb« oar 
»«d i?ft^,',*!s •»»« aw& ^.■;*s:<Siu4ii 4hafc it ©re&tsK* 'm 4X$tiAr\H»;nm<^ &f 
»siy Qena^^uo:!*^^ ea the smrj tbsit iha r>lskintiff m%^ mt i»» 

©ut ?.»r4»tfM»ee, we«t t«s Itif? Biscp for t.h,© e^veu nitii/g fca3.«*iih» 
liiC, &Ktt d.id i«jt fS«Xl in ft «ice1;cr until JuXy liltk; tJ'^jRt 
plfetRtlff'e ficticne w<?i'« «fhdly lis<50S3.Ri.»t6»'l with >>t» l»iBr,viitH6 

cei5tft0t «flt-h th«; msrgcn ©jit 'Of tec fr«i-i»t ^Jii^©3.r» ©f tJ:*:* '«*«gc»ii 

til© vftgonj tijat %}m 4rlV0T ©f tlie t#MJ '&&& tkrown ©r f«rii 
fr®» thM ^ageo toy I'lsajseii ©f tfcie Jairj that ©©at ©f tlaa glaes 
im tia® front «f tli<» oaf «*i« i«JaE.tt«r«Kl, swwi tMi p»rt of th« 
ttw&m of ear «gm» b««ts &t isr&k&n* Tin* ear wa© b^Sng: oj»«2mte4 

li^ a student MOtejEmaisii. witii ih«s rsgul-ffiUP »©t©ifs.ma »t«iiniaing 

t«i«tifl«d that tJi«^r« ^«jre alaout f&Mt p<§wmnn on 'th& froat 
pXiiffomm, whi.X«i others pl«k««4 tli« unAtHiar ^t fst>m twttlYO t« 
fifteen* tb® force with wkioh tJi^ oajf Ktruoic the wa^jott wan 
veuPiouBly aeeorltied liy tiw f»itn<?sfi©» mt *'t«rrifio fore*," 
*gr««tt iJXiiMaot,** "©merely pushed* or ^ahovM** the lamgoaij 
"Merely ©114" ii^ain«t tht? waijea* A nim'feMsr ©f wltRe»««s» t«Bti«» 
fled that lj3iffa«^«Jiat«ly ?il"t®.i" ^h>j --jolliiiiioii tlwy »iii» yiiiiittil'i' 

tBait w»u?.d i;Ti4SiOikt«if *.jt'*t he -m^ iajur<f4» JFlaiatirf t^sitl* 
fi<s4 ^liat t5-ii« ^uas" »?««»« Jw aontact -wilh tJ'i« w-mijoa -irith i.sj?«»t 
fore«; tliett h«» WMi vieX^mtly ehakien a»a tkirowa ^^alnst tli« 



«d^iw ^o«i «i^^ t.m0$- ^pam?^' 

n% ■ ■■'-■*- *^^-''*' ;•*•■■•■■ - >,*ai(3M*)5f#^«*t«^ 

... ....... >. .swj«:..^|l^*s»<hlii«lie -^aiiif'i^ ^'* «» 

-T«r:» •*«■ .;• «?,;*& ^ci9 <Mlf- ♦K^-.5«"ti" ^«»'|i!»«i^:;ijpBJ',."'i.- - ■ -"ii 









•3» 

iiifX*t ef t^«® m^i tlifiit ii« f«!li ti»us»<%t«o sit»oi W4»nt into tiic 
Gj^r, i>«!t d&wti m^ inMlii hit» h«'&£ in hid Ji^i»a.» fer <% f«« 

c»U€»ic; ti'i^t h® g*iV« iiiis fi&sm %& %h«s fia&iiductojpj th?*t m 
Jtm4 a is«4» ii» VAti npiniii that h« ield %ju«^ oojiuucttor l:i« 

«M>.«s 4K*ui*««is tJaat te*t »«Siaroh»« jsrcmiiii ill tm) or t>jjr<?# os4?'ii 
ffcr sf.in ginS.49«e-fet, i#)ej£li3tg fiyr a mm^ isfM «*i» ®«ii«:t to bsitve 
foimrf theaij tlsat ltt« tittfis spKfit Js©«®» i*# sarouisd ©werfil 
i^yS f&$2.i.n4| INfeilea S>^»4 wmf» 0(i>l^Mi';%i%^^ #f hie baak| t>9rmt 
a© wsist i<? hisj iAt^tsfr &i 'tiUBtn^nu '&mcL cUa m>.ei^ wai'k «ir«*?^ 

sn Julyiat^ ja« *i>c liisafiftti te :.a* '«»«# aavjt reisaijiftd th^T^ 
fay «fc0u.t »ix iw^eiiii 0.ajrf ayirig. g^^mt pai«| tij^at iie aft0i»» 

j/«li«s# t© i*»e f©.r tw© ©r Utr©® ssioati*® leAt^n fcn® w&» ®bl« i» 
wrXU witfe «,% w*i«| tijut hm imm ®yifftrc4 sa©r« ojf le&^ti |j«4n 
in i,iie Ixj^ak »iria# %m ao«3id«i']at i m%4 ttei pa*i«r to th«! ssoci* 

inn. A oaao at th«* tim& ef thm trial, fpf^iah ws-ni mora thajn 
two ifsar* «sftey tli* «tef}4d«nt# tfa«?f fjyailaf j^^ifj&ioian m&M 
firat «all,«4 ateoui J'uly 10 th. He f«ui«i tb* i^l^siutiff i»' 
b«<l a0xapi«iiR4«»g of ptin ia ©a® ©f liis limtMi taml hueU^ mtd th« 
jiiai'ittiff fcma Ki ssli^s^it t«Ksi*«irs,tutiN)t» iJurliisg thss r®iaaiiK2«y 
of July %hm ^ii^nimim oalit'ti tfso or th;p©«!( tiEi€'« a dssy «i««l 
ainRsgffi fe;*siit5. plaiKstiff oc-aplKiijaing »i«i «ruffearinf5« Th-sre 
were £» vieitele SMislffl is^f injur/ oxi ^>'Jl(«a.iitAi'f *« ijottyj his 

teetifiteti thnt. k« &t fii^t <li«»^a«>»«vi the troulal® as Bci«i.ti*>» 
rheujufttiiiMftj tltat mert? were »«& %6ru jatt»oi«» «r jruittwred ii|^«»» 

tisis alroat HaT«ia3;^«»» 1912; tiiat plaiatiff wtM ftlfco eufferiwg 
fro^i neuritis; that ia hi» cplnion* tlu^ cQudlticris f eund 
upon e«?3.jaj,naticn of tn*> v>li»intiff «iif'»>t ooour witiiftut aiw 



««!# 









;:^ j'jfv, . ■ f '^: ^nm-t pmfi'$ trntf^t 



^ ■' i" ..• 






f'^1 



.*iijifc^isi, feSJSJvv 






.1 ^A« 



»«ilMin(»*^1t.; 



is iil'Ssi.. 



':- ^: -miim. 't« si^: 



5 •X^UA.nEvi ' 



vioX<*no«, but %imt th«» nenriti* fro;-.t wMclfei plaintiff vtm 
«tiff«.r4Kg, in hi IS o^iaiea^ iisi.8i crujiikI % an i«,jury« r*«fvejr«l 
wiin®3ft»3e tr.otififtti iiiji'c xiri^r t^ tb^ «t.««itiont fe>la.iiit4ff 

hiM u«iKiig cratches* & vhe^X t!^M.ir e^rsa ^ Qeji«« Tk9 |>XsiLint4ff 
ff«.» al^ut 6i? j^ears ©Id at thfs tii^ of th# trlml« '|__«*t> isur» 

ijs^reese^ by tii@ fs?,«t that j>l»l«t iff a,p'j>«iiMr«4i %© be perfectly 
tTh^tik in Mr- r*tiant#^w?Ktfii on th« ifitii.«ft» »is3^id# IHg ontlr« 

tJa«.t tlfeii«' ijury ^flsijs «!'ftrrfi«lr«d in a<?c«ptiisg M» vs^rssioa of 
til© im^tt^r* '^^> hBvet mtT^f^xll^ ex^jisiiii«4 mil ef ^» ©victfsnse 
ia ili« r««!i03i*<!e J^nsi «»sinet «^ itot tJae ir«fr<3.ict i» alesrly 
lailld isiianif«!>«5tlLy «Hgai»et tMe w«i«;bt ©J" iii« e-«rl«ieae«« 

f.)i0 titafsjssKimmt^- «ext ctoiE8itt*i4ia tl»t tjti<s dasmg*-?® ar« 
eatQa«'.vivsi» f« Imv® ht»r»t©for« diasmes^ii tja^ «viti*?nfl0 a« t« the 
a*tur«} &a.4 mi%m%t of plsiln%iff*» iiijuyi«»* M tSi*> ti?a« et 
ti».« si<30ia«R^ ii« 'sfss about SC v«(ars? of ©gflf^ wsjb h«»ltlQr aaad 
tt«tlif«j 1»« ure.© etjga^istl Ik tlj« bM«jlK«^««5 &f mt^v 4mil44ng 

t«iis«<3 a ®h&.^. fi»« iiSfiri«i«Mt®e ietidn %© »ah©w that h« ««.« unalsie 
t-o att«jwl to hid lmsi»^«& cm aco&ustt ef itka it:iiuri«^9c &n4 
'«r&0 oeii^<?}.l«<«l to ii»ii4o|r si.<£4itl&3rml htXp* l^clXo^^-licii: U«« 
ci.eal40.Qt h9 sufr^srea i;r>'':at ptkin bmu aontiisue4 t« #uf'r«r 
sMV^ or leet? j^n fri&m th& tisi^ of th# &«^aiu<&»t uatiiiX the 
tot« «»f tl:t« trial, £m<l Ute ;(ury isiiig^t luive r<m«!Gi!ii^bly Inw 
ferjr«»d thai lii» ia^ujriea w re perBaan«at« la v4»* of feii 
the ftYid«n<j« in the easo* i»r« as^^Lsatsot luty thai tl&« «ueitou»t 

Th« d«fffflt»driintsa«art 'WJit'^nd t>»t th« tirguiaeut 
«f ooiittftel 'or 9li<ji«tiff t» the Juiry *«« liajiropeir. In i3i» 
oi^ttniug arguuent to th« Jujry €$oun«el for plaintiff »iAidt 



.ttMl% Jli>te*» (BWf.. «»4-#*:*fc^ M **Wf«»*.»iV 









«»5« ' 

'Oct 30ur»«i, 1 e&miGt prove » /jjsd thi^re la lao 
ovicien0«i in l^r«* of nftmt he lost lii hio bu«iinese, ami I 
ORim&t 4giv« you %h«tt» for it woul^ b« i£e^^3^|>«r« 

ltr» ^OB^nUml: X object* 

The Courts Otojeatien eustaiit&a; tt it is n&t iudira 
4on*t &r(gus about it* 

Mr* Atmes; It ic not h<ir^ <%»4 I a£& m>). lurguing 

ftWut it* 

tbM Courts Vama. <ioi»*t sgrguOt (i«3i»*t a^enti'.]^ it*** 

Awd continuing* oeun&«l erga«4 that the ^\xsf h»4 a right to 
««sime that sino® thi$ pXaiimtiff ims etiXl t»)tjifr»ri»^« aore than 
tnKW ye«i3rB itft^r lJi« i*.eoid«ttt, he wpouxd oosttiau^ to euffeir, 
{m4 ymt «hiX# plistiiitiff t@8ttifi@<& that h€i h0|»i»4 i&nd believed 
he steals \4lti£syat«»ly r^soovev^ iiuok 8tfiit«isae«it % p>i^ntiff tsius 
i3K»t finaJL »r eoa<aiUBiv«, but tbat th« %va^ Imd a rlgiat t« 
tak« tba evid^nae? ixi th<i oajie iato c^s&id ©ration in 4et6n»i8* 
ii^ th<& qu«st-4«a whether th© plaintiff would ultima toly 
ip«"00ver» Cciunsei ^^mx tstatM: '^But 1 dois't 1»eli©ve h© i»ill 
r«oov«r*" Tho o»wrt oveiTulad «m ©Istjcfotion t© this aggufij^nt 
aatl tte.it! J "Counsel, has a ri^jht to 4rair jr<KRSonable eeaoluBicno 
from th« eviitonae; but tii« jury k»o%? what th« eviaone© is*** ^ 
JFrofia the for»i5^oiJ5g it apj.ears that the oourt properly ©ust«ln» 
•d ttn objection to tuct argtiaimt as to pos&ihie lose of plain* 
tiff's husineau, at^ toXd counsel m»t to 8&«ntit»n the eubjeot* 
Afi to the «iq|»r»jii0ion of iX\% belief of aouno^l th^at tho plain* 
tiff would ultisaateiy recover, there was no intii?«ition that 
thie waa ba«e(l on onyUiintf oxoopt Mx^ ovid«?nce in tho oi!&««»anil 
t^i« error, if any, twi^i iiorj5a»«»* i!|tato x,, ^riaJk.eir . 135 Jtii»345, 
Furtherr^r© th« only ill «ff««t of argument touching plsin* 
tiff*« lofto of l/U6i«*ss»e or tho iiaprob«.bility of hio ulti» 
sttito rooover, trouia be; to unduly inor<$as3t« this luaount of 






.*J «t>**«wra 4^m^^ 4^'gmi. r^mh 0«fiT U'tj(«w?^ «^ 

-■it ttoa't&itw €m£| ^jiKiiff «r4Mil£ ^j-Sift, 'i«**' «^»<^ l«6f«-'fc'^'-JV! «iji5 >9»Ts1; 
v^^4-?*j»r'- *?■' •'.• f'^&i*rib^r^"''^9m $^i^^ ^AM^pi^ isi'»''-'iii»mifi mUf'tifU 



*6» 
vem not «JE;ae»»iir# andtiJe d«»feaci«nt« woret ttaos'«for«» »ot 

In his Qloif.iiig .aJf^wja^jnt esti«fi»l for plaintiff 
s«tld: "Sow thi^S!"® Aif« sirejn «=meu6« for tb*:' @e^ tim^ rmn inte 
0» the licab^r iwaisoa not beiiig h©r«, Siijsi ^^'e ajr© mJt- eurpric^d 
ttfttr h**.ari»g tMe «vi«J«*ns« t»© know that fa© ie. whoro he ie* 

Mx* M&n&fti Vou a.r« noi ®wrprie©4 at ti«.t iafoitaa- 

llr« H«a«ic»e; Iht force ©f that ©©llieten UB4<*r th® 
«irt.den«je &er<f would ®»pl,iiia v^ry lik®iy «i4sjf he is «fli«?re h« le«. 

iUr« MweatJmls tJsat »tat©«a®at->*» it eajs ®fif»» ^at 
en* thine«* timt the wmi di«4 at a re»u.Xt of the iiMux^* i^»«i 
Ji ob4«ot te it* 

itr* itian#»; t ai<ia»t »a-y aai^thiisgj ©f the kiml. 

yJHt« cl^ujs-t} lliait until the ob^feotios ^«t int© 

Kr* Hett«nt>mXl tliai 0tat^@t«ot a»«i th«i iiifcir«n$9 

r«»ultiiES6 th^iT^trcm not being; lbHftB«4 en t3a« «Ti<ie»<i« in t^'iia 
aa8«»> I rtaspttotfully o\>4^^^^ "^^ 

tJi« vourtj 0fej«otioa »ttBtal.«i«siii , aiafl tb« Jury will 

Tito strgwiKSserit 0* aaA.n»cl ess cscv© »«t forth ■«?©* 
oXe«arly ijrAj^roj^or, «uautJs« oeuri gx\;taptlir Bu&tiiiaed ais ©bjee- 
tion t© it asMl tcl6 th<Sr jvury te d-iarega*-^ it* l%i*>y tl5i<-^*« 
eii'CuKiBtsiioftfi, w« caiisxt ©lag? thfet th« JU'igrjoat sbeuXU \«& 



♦-'if^iJfJIirT ivies' 



r<.tv®r«0d, g^l„ ££ ghkB&k X*. JiSMlSk* ^^^ ^^^- «^Sj 

A !£&• ^SU. X*. Wiia^ , 148 ill, fiSlj !& iM» io, & iUU kx Ma Mx 
t? K>lmtr«. aCii'J ill. aa$i. 



ai^fftMiiiijiitifi a®j{,t co«t«»i^ timt the -oourt OGia» 
aittafi rev«r«i1»ie wrywr i» giving to th# jury insstTuction 

p«ttUermi»o« ©f tiw ^fyideuoe 4b not to b«> dctsy^im^d aXoitie "by 
the nuB5J>«r ef aritisi«»a.(se t#«tifyi«iiS; tteit kn a.^termistng th«> 
<3lu««t.ion ®f t-h« prfgrpeaj^^rRne©, llj» Jw^y ©ay %&k& inte o©»» 

isJiil# t««»t4fyi33tg;., iii«ir aj^tmy^fat i»t®3vli,5g«ra0e «r laak of 
ittt<slli^ejrioe, th«fir intei'^et or laci^: &f intmr&Bt in %h^ 
ra&ult »f tiii? suit. If anjf, tlvisiir ©p.jj^jrtmsiities for .-kacsriag 
!>:&« jiimtt®r» «*to0ut wMcifj tln^' t«*®tl.fy» "timcl from fell th^®* 
eircmsi8t«ma«« d«t«triai«# ea «Moh iside the pr«i-i»oaa«rftno« of 

Im^truotion M, 14 9mm9TH%t^ c^rtfitin things tim% 

ihi:^ 4^^^^ ehoald ts(>ke ia.t« cx^iasiat^riiiiticn in det«;'r2iaininig upon 

4«noe lies ano. tol^ th« 4uxy timt th«»y sheuia consi^ev th«@«» 
*iii ^Ifirw of all %h& oth»r cvia* »c«« faots cm«^ «)lrou£9»t2Mao^ii 
l^rovett 911 th* trial*** 

fhiB p«urtii3t«lftr ol>J«ctioa u^fjirtwi tt^ ins^tructicn 
ii$e« :iS t» ti'iat it. ^-^«si »ii&l<3«^in^ in t4).rbt« '^ille it advised 
tJao jury Ujiis.-S. isi ^i t«?rj£lnias tho prt-tHfad^sr^jsg* of Ui« evi« 
doBiJ© Ui^i^ ud^ht teK« into oun0i'J«ra.|<i«il Una niifiiber of 



|i^ ,111 u% ,miM^ M M^U^ M^MMk *mm9m% 



»l4;3t #i« *t:^i£iiii <t3 



«»^x«aCl «ifeiiMft»9 i^^i^dii* ^cfci ,>j5iti^' ij;»»| »:)#'> -«*a#:,A*W''iii^^^, -^^^ 



■»it3t'Si5#ig t«ffitlfyi«g in fa-¥or of eitixer part^ &«: U: ^ 

oiiif that it lisa4t«d ih® ^ury Im ti«st«yi!cJ.Kiag the !:iu«6»ti»n af 
the sir«pcsiaer<?.no« «f tils' «*ri4eRo« tc .n 5!®B»i<i«raii©a ©cl^ 

Mi^^*4 to laa!txiA«Jti«J!l ^©« W i«s Umt it toc« iwt seatmin 
*tJi« ife|?p«sur^«t ©0!S«4s;t«r««3f, f®4ya«f«a anti oosjgspyity cf the 

tioa Vdits^M tVmt it liji4t«<£ fchi^ ^uar^ in ■(J.-st^raiKiug the 

isif t tff^'f; %ii a#»»i4«^ svll te* ^-i4.«&<54B *K# »3Ul tfe® fx'.ate (m4 
eno® or gxtatf-jr w«ij?;htfe df th.« evitl'smee li«-s. xs, Rx* Sjl 2SLm, 

i>, ^ai&» *2^^^ ^^i» '^^x gyijjg^ x«. ^^^^ r f ■ ^^^■^''» i-^v^ £§,* j^'^e 111. 

IttBtruotioe J*a« 14 Ig: t5ubj«ot t© U»c- <vbi«5cttort that tli*! 

«Im:«.rit, iit^'iji'e-Vf'X', ots^iiaftl fpv ilm ^f^ftmii^mntB &on.n(id& wrs 

tis« 4*iJir »«r« li«>l«i iltttt 1« a»ttn*?aiHlrjj£ %h^ qtt«6ti..'>» en 
«hi«JU cicife WiC pyepc'isderf:iio© of th« avi^isnoft liet* tVsey 
ah«ul<i tek« i»to caBLSiil<^ratioii "all the oth^^r faet* im<i 
eiroi»»tan<ses proved on the tricil. If any*** Wo ttr«g tJi' r«» 
foro, of the oi>ittttm tluit th«?»« tm?© iii»truation», whil« 
not fftriotl^fr {steiaurat« yAimi armi4 tOjg«th«ir» ar« not »o mio* 
leasiii^ as to %.^«.rrci.Mt a revera«»l of tJ» JutigjjMRnt. 



baa A^lfrAt 9d.i lie ;:^j;* .;.^v}'>,avy *s0ll>3 :i^^l«I%*0 «* *!^^ ^?t*l 

;isi ;95 .;. tot ..^^MMl^^mM l^^^ *«^ 

,.♦«!« i«trr s^=tc-«'. ».t:ju,j:,t^^^i3,^ . a{|#^ « g^ ^-^^^ -^.d^^y'; >:■ . 

flwnr AlMAdgfd «4 :^mm^Q. «t^v«v^«i^ »*rA»i;:3S>is 



«t tSiS airouit Court 0f Ct>c* O0unty will 1j« aff i»«d. 



(7>^' 



lie - i-:i3i69 



PLOPLi. OF mi^ i.^TATK OF / ) 

ILLINOIS. \ / ) 

Def endapt in i-^ror, / ) BJRJiOR TO 



vs. 



iSUHIClPAL COURT 
OF CHICAGO, 



LUfli. ROiilviJBKRC , \ / ) 

Plaintiff m Jlr/or. ) _ ^ « =^ 

V 20 0I«A. 1 

Sffl. P'-?^^niDI?fC Jtt TIC;,' :5jcCU!1::.Ly 
iJiJLlVi^iiiD TdE OPIiUCK OF THE COIjflT, 

v/Defendant, Louis H08enberg, ohurgod with the 
crime of obtainini? money hy ffilse protonaos, van found 
guilty and sentenced to iiapriHonmant and fined. By thie 
7:rit of error he seoica to have the .judgment of the court 
reversed, 

^t ts c.rgued that the information is wholly in-» 
nufficient, Und<»r the istatute - chnpter 38, sec, 4CR, 
Murd*3 111. ;;tat, « tho accuf?.-ition will be cuffirjient if 
it ntatoo tJie off inrae in tlio lojig'-^age of the etfitute, "or 
so plainly that the nature of thn offense raaj,'' bo oaaily 
undorBtood by thd Jury," j Tho information chf?.rccs thnt the 
defendant on a certain day, in Caiacig^o, "did nith intent 
to choat and defraud and to obtain money by falRe pretenses, 
did obtain from the affiant tho mm of one hundred ^yid fifty 
dollars ( U^O) by falao'.y reprosentin^- to this affiant that," 
- follO'jei by avernanta in detail of a nuinber of repr'^sentations 
nado by tlio dcf'jnliint an to aervicos perfornied by him and 
cxpanoGH incurred, and correlative averments dmylng that 
defendant had done each one of the things which he repre- 
sented to have beon done by him, VWie oinisdion of the 
stj.tutory word "designedly'' is not fatal sdiere the infor- 









i«V 



: J. 



I .A.I OOS 



• ^©X'it; ^^ 



bite flLfcfi T<<" foepnot'i'sq; sooivspa o%? c.h ^fwifcrfottsl) .,. „. . 



Bcitlon avers witb particularity representations of things 
done, with a negative averment aa to their performance; the 
existence of »uch facte would be Imprjoai'ble without aiow- 
ledge and design on the part of the defencinnt; therefore 
knowledge and oeiiign will be ia^lied. 

The inf ornifition wa^3 sworn to by .'vnna T.ijrrtle Moss, 
and the avermont that the raoney war, obtained ••from this 
affiant" is sufficient. It will be prestimed that the money 
was in genuine money of the United states 'onlesr. the infor- 
rcataon is challenged by motion to quaah, whi<sh was not done 
in this car.e. This observntinn is also epplicsble to the 
Objection thnt the inf orrafiticn fails to ppenify the kind 
end value of money. /e think it Huf'iciently appears that 
the person defrauded by the false representations wr^P the 
person filing the informntlon, and it elso aufficiently 
Bppears tn?it she relied u;;on the representations made to 
her. If th'3 defendfait rn'^de represfjntations ar> to the things 
done by him, while the fact ^a.s th t he did not do them, 
it would follow that he knev? rmch representations ^ere 
false. It will be preBumed that the person filing the in- 
formation owned the money which wws obtainedfrora her. None 
of thuse objections 'io to the substance of the inf orm -tion, 
and as there was no motion to quash, the motion in arrest 
of judgment would not reach sucii defects in an information, 
for, aa it was held in Peo;:)le v. ve ber , 152 111. App . 102, 
whatever is included in or is necessarily implied from an 
express allegation need not be otherwise averred, 3ee 
Maynard v. P eople; . 135 111. 416. 

ether points are presented which go to the pro- 
ceedings before the court. None of the evidence hna been 
preserved by a bill of exceptions, and it does not aupear 
from the record that all of the proceed in s in the trial 



•s- 



-to'ioi M.'fit :;a>9lmr «Si#<s,to fofvtinU ©rf* to ^«©£r pniiJjswgf «i w^r^ 
&j{* o;; ald.so titrqs oeLs; ffi ,iC'l#A".^eatf«> siift v6«jb» oAifJ «x 

.miitowro^nJt na« ni; air.,.. ii>fc rioii-js tfojssstj *ob hlifcm tti^Ntt^ifl \t> 

^^6£ .ir«5A ..fii R^x #:xKtf?j^ ,v i^j[gQj^.y, ni Mfflii b«w tl at- ^lot 



court are b fore ua. Under such circumstoncea it will be 
preauiaea that tnere were proceedings before the court 
sufficient to suatain the judgment. The record shows that 
the def enaunt iiit^ed a waiver of trial by jury, cmd it is 
claimed thiit Bubsequently there Trae an attempt to withdraw 
this whxch was denied by the court. However this may be, 
in the absence of a cozES>lete bill of exceptions showing all 
the px'ocoedinga before the trial court, every presuinption 
will be in favor of the n^gularity of the proceedings. 

Other BUg;-;eationB are rnaie but are not of 
sufficient imporxance to require that the judgiaent be 
reversed. I c is therefore affiraed. 

AFFIUMSD. 



tiQl^^sj^^'tq, "(C«0T«» ,^ii?oo I-sii^ ssilS- ^"sat^f a3Ptli:>©ft^5o-it^ wtu 
to <^©fx ©"^a -*««^ ®-^^«® ^^^^ aaK>itf.a«»,^i^8J»« ^»i^d 



An infor-Tfrtior unier sss.' 403, ohao.- 33, Rune's 111. Stst. ithij^ oirits the »crd 
8S'i?r!s31y" used ir. said ssDtion is not fat&lln dsfeotive Khers tbs inforT&tion 
srs witb partioul tifity repressntetions of things dons, with & nB^ativs tvertrsTt 
to their cerf orn&r.os: krjoAlsd4s and desi4r will bs ifnplied. 

An inforT.Bition undar see. 433, ob&p.- ?3, Hurd's 111. Stat., is sufficient Khisb 
ers the T.oney was obtained "fro-r thiu affitrt", or «hish fa-ils to alleys the 
ney was genuine Toney of the Urited States, or the kind and value of toney, or 
&t the oerson defrauded was the oerson filing the inf or-riat ion, or that he relied 

the infornation ^iven him, or that the defendant knew the falsity of his reore- 
ntations as to things done by hiii which he had not done, or that the persDn 
lin4 the infornetion owned the Toney obtained froi> hiir:. and a potior in arrest 

judiTent will not reach such defects in the absence of a irotioti to ouash,- 



Where none of the evidence is preserved by bill of exceptions, and the record 
lis to show all the proceedings in the tritl court are before the appellate court, 

will be presufned there were proceedings before the lower court sufficient to 
stain the jud^Tent, and every oresurrption will be in favor of the regularity of 
J proceedings. 



•10S iirlJ 3ii«o isxff» .i3JS .((I a't'jo:! ,r: '-* .ses letnu flor Jisif'io* 

fcid« dnstcilTus si ,,^4i2 .III s'fciuK ^5? -.ajsifc ,£C^^ ,9a« 'Je^ ^T-icrj 

TO ,!/3'"foff "ic suLev £rl« fcrrxjj sdi f() .gatjsJS fca.ti(t!J sdJ To v.efto*'' eniunat g, 
fcscIs'T 3:1 i>HJ ic .-rToii^frioliJC S'-JJ JaxJx") fiea-ieq a^li saw fc;:: ' 

ftogiaq gffi t^rfi 10 ,aTo(: >tan! fcsd eii licMw ifxd \jd,en<jt s^nxiJ oJ s^ aff< 
J.^stiif li iioiJof 4 fe'ijs :iiH <ro'5l fesuxH.tcio vsffOfp ©dJ fcenwo no rJ«i?io1f»i &$•. 

rjoesT srid trie ,S't!.;lJq3i:i<s ^0 flxd ^6 t-^jvisp.vnq si aoasfcxvs e4i ')o eoon ^ 

Tc vJxi«I(;|c"i sdvf 'ic •lev,*'} 'If e;'! {li'-v 'tci iu"su39^a y/iavs fcfis ,Jnsi!5fcot &fii 



2S8 - 22243 



P 



f^ 



IHS UKITEB tiTATES UTiiOaHAiH CO.. )^ 
SL corporation, 

ilaintiff in £rrop, 

\ 

▼ 3. \ 

\ 

AkIi3UCAt< IROiUKG kACiilMi: CO., . 
a corporation, i / 

Defendant iri^ Error. 




ERROR TC JBUKlCIi-AL COURT 
OF CHICAGO. 



I.A. If 



l&R, PRSaiDIHC- JUSTICE McaURELY 
DELIVKRKD THE OI-IHlQK 07 TKE COU^iT. 



plaintiif by its utateiaent of claim ecugiit to 
recover a balance due lor gooas, wnres and merciiandise sold 
to defendant under a certain contract. Defendant by ita af- 
fidavit of defense denies the aiaking of the contract as al- 
leged by plaintiff, alleges tiie auiiing of another contract 
covering txie aaaie subject aatter, in which plaintiff is in de« 
fault and consequently indebted to defendant, foi wiiion it 
luakes a claim of set-off for the amount of ^19C,li. , Upon 
trirl by the court tne i;;aues were found for tJtie defendant aa 
to plaintiff's statement of claim and for the plfiintiff as to 
defendant's set-off. plaintiff by this ^^it of Rrror brings 
in review the record and judgment of the court, n.na defendant 
iias filed croaa-errora pertinent to its clniiii of set-off. 
I There ia no serious dispute as to the fr^cts 
giving: rise t-o the controversy ,"" ilaintiff is enga^^ied in tne 
lithographing business at Ilorwood, Ohio; the defendant is 
located in G icago. .in tnc fall of 1913 ti.r, F, L. silke, a 
Chicago salesfsan for liifc plaintiff, called st-veral times 
upon the defendant and solicited n.n oi-der for a quantity of 
lithograph displays or, mmt are called in the trade , 
"cutouts." After negotiations defendant plHced v/ith ir. 
Wilke an order v/ritten on one of the printed forrus of the de- 



\ 



t^ii^a - 8as 



1 1.1. u., - ^y.: 'Jq, i ij J 



itioo OA'iXdxxuM ^t hojdis ( , 



«^tai>XHo vo ( 






t'l.AJOOSV^/ 






faamiaoM soiTsytr osfais^ff im 

-'lis edx ^(f i(ifiijrt9laa ,io«<x4n.c»s) alja^iss » 'i&bau inx&bawt^b cH^ 

-•1) ni ei: 'llxinisXq ri:>iilw ai »fft*c?KB[ ^^aattfi*® ®*^o «^ ^ii«voo 

aoqii ,0X,0«X# lo Jiifcoaa ya^ to'J 11o-;f9a to aiaCs « sd^fsa 

oi 84 ttxJaXiiXq BfW tol bciM t&ialo lo iwaiso j>:i^ye »*'i1iittiMiq^ «i 
a^xitf noTra to Jxivi' e.ifU v;tf 'ni;raxjBXi .1;'to«;f»« a 'jn^ifcaetsli 

,tlo-*9« 'to sIjbXo Mil oJ *nanl^i9q sncx^d-atsoio tolil aaui 

eX Jnjssndteb t»xij ;oiiiu ,;^oowioH Is aeanxsud s<>>Xrii^j3t|kQjcfiXX 

4 ,9:iXXW .^ .-a .ti SXfel lo IXal sfl^T ni .os«olaO ai b^i&o^I 

«»aXi XAi»v»a fiarXXao t'ilijaiAiq mU lol rtsaie^Xae o^cx; ; 

lo \iiiaAup M tol rt^Mo an l»o*xoxXoa 6n« Jaijbnalob »iy aoqa 

.•jbAiii 9iW ai b»XI»o otA .»Ariw .lo ex«i<l8Xb ilqaisoiiJit 

,10. tiilv i>»OiiXq Jn«i>a9l(»l> eaoiJ>UJoa9n xailA ".s^uoJuo* 

-»i^ 5.ai lo 3in"xol f>9J J lo otto ai. nsiJiiw lai.'-io rj« aalXlW 



fend£tnt. This order wae not accepted by plaintiff, v-micii 
made out an order on one of its own printed blanks and thjcou^ 
ita salesman, Ir, .Vilke, tnis latter order was presented to 
defendant and sif.ned by it. This order, whicii is quite long, 
conts^anin^: a ntwiber of specifications and details, was for 
2, (.0 cutouts at a price of 65 cents each, totaling 4:1,500. 
At the bottom of the order, wnich was printed ir; part and 
partly typewritten, ^.'aa thia cl&.uc>e: "Subject to acceptance 
in City of Norwood, Ohio, by the United states printing & 
LilSiiOgrapii Oo,, sole sales afoent." (Tiie difference betv/een 
this name and the tme of tiie plaintiff is immattrinl, } in 
reply to this order plaintiff cent to defenaant a purported 
acceptance, whici: in uevcral particulars v/as not in accord 
with tiic terms of the order. lai/riediately upon receipt of 
this defendant wrote to plaintiff noting the variances and asling 
plaintiff to acknowledge receipt of the letter, "as the order 
is soKie«?hat at vnriance with your acknowledgment," To this 
plaintiff replied, saying, *' v/e did not reply to youru of jpnu- 
ary 3rd, having referred same to our Chicago office tc take 
up with you," oubsequently Ur, ^vilke of the Ci.icagc office of 
the plaintiff called upon defeixdant to settle the auttters 
raised in tne above corrtapondence. At tiiis and a subsequent 
interview the defendant, acting through its president, r. 
Grosse, and ;,.r, .Vilko, representing the plaintiff, entered 
into an oral contract as follov7a: The defendant afireed to 
purchase from plaintiff l.t.oo cutouts, defendant to pay 
plaintiff i^9'wij therefor, the whole 1,0'..0 cutouts to be billed 
and paid for ifamediately, the cutouts lo be i:cpt in storage 
by the plaintiff and shipped to the defendant in lots of 
about 250 at sucxi tiaes as the defendant should call for 
them, Subsequently 511 of these cutouto v/ere shipped to and 



gjjcarii^ Jbaa a:i.ti»L<i b^itiixq ti^O eli to su- - -. _._..- - ... ..- 
ill ( ,ini-f3i^fitsmi si: ^'ii^nisicf aricf to ^mi ^di fen« war 

t»6<S0 »^tf 86" ,t©d-*9X ?idi 1.0 vtq£9O»''X'»Sf>»Xw0t!!5li».e 

-■-fi-i v:Ig>i *(S>iT IjiJ s¥" ,-,'aa.', 

oi Jbeetaa ^K«wii9'if :0woXi -.n#ap» im- 

fesiXid :>i; ■'>♦ e^jjo^ifo 0';;o,l 0XO; , colei^ii^ <:>twt HXj 

»a*i- JJuO add ,^4X»3. 

le ai 



accepted by the defendsnt, and a bill for 1»CU0 cotouts w&a 
rendered the defendant in karch, 1914, for $650, vvhich v?aa 
paid. I nder the oral contract for 1,000 cutouta 489 more 
were due to the defendant, i-laintiff did not ship this niuii- 
ber but shipped 1,6U0 cutouta in a single shipment and in- 
aiated upon the defendant accepting the same. IJo opportunity 
was given defendant to acceit the balance due on ita contract 
for l.wCO cutout3, tlaat ia, 489. The defendant refuaed to 
accept txiis shipment from the railroad coiap?)ny, 

ilaintiff clai/aa the existence of a contract of 
purchase for 2,000 cutouts. Defendant c:ain-aina that the 
only contract Hj»de between the parties was the oral contract 
for 1,000 cutouts, and that as it has advanced pa.ysient for 
cutouts not delivered, it is entitled to recover on its set- 
off, v^ 

■,7e are of the opinion that the- -yritinga between 
the plaintiff and the defendant did not amount to a contract, 
Ilaintiff argues and predicates its- ulaim upon the aasuxiption 
tiiat the writing dated nieceitber V-i, 1913, ^^"i,ich is the order 
for 2,CCC cutouts, v^o-a tne contract of the parties. This 
however ia error, as it appears clearly fror.; the. l.-ngucge of 
this order that it was merely an offer ;i'3de by the defendant, 
and in terina it is made eutject to the E.cceptance in : orwcou, 
Ohio, by the united _tatts irii-ting a Lithograph Co. ;.'hether 
or not tiiie order would be accepted ntis uncertain, ?nd until 
it was definitely aid without iuodif icstion accepted it waa not 
a vBlid contract, Thio .uld seec toe cl(;?r to xtciire argu- 
ment, A case directly in point is i: older v. >.ul truan , 1G9 
u, J, bl. The purported acceptance by the plruntiff in reply 



-Jijua aiH:? q'ixia J-«n hlb l^xiJniE-J,'i: ,,;3-0fSi>ci«r4sjx ■ ;->« 

"id soBTinoo i- '.to &":jaa,t(;i;x5» \*.d* at^txiilo tit t :•.'■'■' : 

'ins sti. no Tdvoooi o# b'}lJiSiS.& Bt tl ^k^^-tn>tiW» Jfoa sJiiciws 

. :'io 



to this order varied froca thf; teres of the offer, i..nd there- 
fore creftted nc contract but amounted to a rejection and left 
the offer no lo;.ger open. In toI. 9 Cyc,, p, 267, la & long 
list of deciciiona sui-porting the proposition that an accep- 
tance to be effectual aiuat be ider^ticsil with tae offer and 
uficonditional, i^>here one offers to do a definite taxing and 
another accepts it conditionally or introduces a new term into 
the acceptance, hia answer i3 eitner a mere expression of 
willingness to negotiate further jr it ia a counter proposal, 
but in neither case in there a. contract. '.'iiis rule is sup- 
ported by such an abundance of autuority ao to make further 
couia&ent unnecessary. Tnis ia alBc the rule even if the dif- 
ff-rences aii'.y not be of groat importance in the xaind of one 
of the parties. The test aa to the fact of a ccntratt does 
not depend upon the greater or less degree of diiTerence be- 
tween the parties; the acceptance xnuat be in tiiC identical 
terais contained ir. the. offer. 

The: situ&tion, therefore, was, when ,r, Wilke 
called upon the defendant pursuant to instruction from the 
plaintiff's home office and its letter to defendant, that 
the matter mrs entirely open, and the parties through their 
representatives ■were corripetent to make such .'it;reetn.ent or 
contract for tiie purchase of cutouts as tnigiit be liiutually 
egreeable. That tne contract was tnen laade between these 
parties for tlie purchase of l,i;c;Q cutouts ia uox. seriously 
disputed, ly its letttr of Janurury 9, 1914, stating that 
the Chicrco office -ould tci:e up the uuitter with defendant, 
plaintiff is estopped to deny the authority of i.r. wilke 
of its Chicago office to make the contract. Ly tnia letter 
defendant ia mforK.ed tuat the matter had been referred to 
the Chictvgo office for settleiuent. It cannot repudiate this 



\lJL«i,/,7A(in fid jfir^ic 6A a5uoiiio I0 »8^iU)iw| sjui lot dsjsxj^aoyi 



nuthority. In i.arx ei a l, v. £j;»ibk» ■'■^'^ ;=icix, Ai5ti» it ia 6«.id: 
"that if one party rQi'v.ra ariothcjr to a 'ciiird j^eroun i'or in- 
formation, &8 autiiorii;cd to act or linawer fox- xxii-i, .he <tnll 
be bound by tiie actions ana stateineata &i' tae pcsrs:on kio re- 
feiTed to," i-lalntiff ' & arguxticnt aa to tiie autij.or.ity of ir. 
Wilke jjroceeds upon the assumption tiiat on tiie date of the 
Iftter of J'.i.riuury 9tn tiiere was a contrrict oetween tiit par- 
ties, and ufon t.'iia asauiiiption it argues tr.at parol evi- 
dence cannot be i^trmitted to -jiir/ txi.e tc-ras of a written 
contract; but as we haTs sii;0'7c i>ta~ved, at thiw tiiflt; tij.ere 
was no contract "oei\'ieen the piirtiea, and i>r, I'tilke LG,d au- 
tiiority to ciake auch contract as ::ii^ht &e agreed upon. 

The court was asked to hold as a .-ropOisi tlon of 

law, aubut&ntxully, that x'lien a principal periuits a pursoii to 

be 
appear to/niij agent, either generally or for a particular 

purpose, ne v;iil be estopped to deny ciucu &^cncy to the 
injury of tnird pcrsono who huve in tiood faith and in tiie 
exerci.'.«e of reasonable pruaence aeait witu the agent on the 
face of such appetirancoa. This propooition correctly ottt-ted 
the law and siiould have been ^ivcn by the court. 

Ue noid that when plaintiff shippe-d l,6v.;.' of 
tlieae cutouta, ir^siating t.i.'xt the vaitten dociiOientJi wore the 
real contract and that tae pui'chaae was for k:,v;'-w cuti.uta, it 
repudiated tho ccntrcict for 1,^,'JO cu«outo. ^yefeuuant, there- 
foi-e, Wis oJititluu to treat t-ae contract ua bruachtd and to 
aue flor duttjag'^a, its contract v;as for l.GCO cutoutii, xox 
■«tiioh it was to pay ^9<jC, j.t received dlx of wiieijc, .»iiich 
the evidence a.hOT/a were v/orth 4^45V,9o, it has paid piaxntiff 
ii^650, and ia tuerefore tntitied to recover the difference be- 
tween tnese acuounte, which is ^190,10, i'he Judt:rufc.nt of the 
trial court was correct aa to plaintiff's st&tesient of claim, 



to floi*lscq<Jiq' « <j!£ bfoii 03' .u«jJ.s® s4w irEWOo 3£tT 

•xsIuoi-tiEAii M lol '10 v.Iifii3n9^ ■asti^tx© ,i'«es* 8ii:i^vO^ HH^iqa 

..Jajjoa arid- s^ti i^vi's zti'^4 isve^d. Ibiaosi^ &a4& wjai a^i* 
lo 005,1 6tjqivjiiSa TiiJuijoIq aaitisr Jjsii4 blca. 0W 

lol «cJuodi;!> i>vK>,I tol Oil/: ioB*tinviD i-jL * es-^KtSjB^ x&H &jjs 
-loll ; ,:>*eriJ 1& lit i)ai'i;ftiit)'X ^i ,0uC4. ■^«<r &i «** J-Jt iiot'.y 

,<si«X9 lo *iiSij-iJ«Jt> sxi ir>9ll0i} ei«w J'supo X»lTi 



but a finding shouici htive beeu lufide for defendant for tJac 
affiount clHJJutjd in iiw aet-olf, 'iim jud^supnt of the trial 
court will be reversed and judfisent v*ili be entereu in this 
court i'oi ttkii uefendant Ji^aindt tim plaj.ntiff for ^Ivu.lu 
witi* coat«, 

KKViiHam) AND JUDCpMEM' hJBi,. 



3fi[5- lot ^fjifmaAl^h TOl &baia. H^i-«<i ovarf i^^ilf'^^w guii^i'i « #wd 



^^0 



2&Z - 22^37 



Defendant in Error, ) 



5 . 



lil^HOi'S, TO THi': &UiaCIi'.;y- 



\ ) aCUBt OF CHICAGO. 



AHTliUl? %, A>»iDBHBeK. '■■, 



i-laintiff in fcrror, j 



) fCt 



I 



JIH, JUiUTiCir: HOLDOiU BKLiVKRKl) TBI OlliUOlI 0? THE COURT. 

"^Dafendant and plaintiff entered into a coxitraect 
for tiie w&le by defendant to pl&intiff of cert«iin real es- 
tate designated as nimbc^r 1117 west Ohio ii^^treet, Chicago. 
fixe conMideration recited in tn© contract to be paid by 
pX&intiff 10 5;7,ii6v!, -tiie contract aliso recitea taat 4i500 
W8.8 paid aa earufcst faoney, and that on tu,e jpaseing of tiie 
conveyance and cloaing of tiie transaction tz-ie: reaiaining aum 
du« on the puroiiaee price should be liquidated by tiie pay- 
fficnt by plaintiff to defendant cf ,i|.l,000 in irioney and the 
giving of a first ftiortfi.a^.e for |.4»0U0 and » second Eiort^sage 
for $1,750, secured upon the premiaes sold, the contract 
iMid earnest iaouey were to be iield by imvigato <j«ivlngQ Bank 
in eacrow for tn<? benefit of both parties to tne contract, 
J«une» H, Navigate , oT the bnnJc bearing Mss narae, wae the 
a^^ent wno negotiated the s»l« and x^rocured the contract to 
be eigntjd by the parties to it. 

I'laintiff haa failed to Join in error (^t argue 
the cause. 

On a trial before the court plaintiff had Judg- 
ment for $&OCi, which defenannt aak^ tx.ia uourt to reverse, 
i la in tiff refused to carry out the contract and deaianded Xha 
returs of the earnest money on the contention that he iiad 
been induced to sign the contract to purchase the property 
by faliae and fraudulent reireacntationa iiode to aia by 



t: 



\ 



nm& - i^as 



Xia^or*' 



^ Q A T O 






,»»f«st- ni.' 4tiw»l>«#"j0ii 



( 



,«v 



-a» Xissii tiisJ'jt'aa 1« ttunmiq o.# *,nj»|>4V»t#4/ '€«( «Xb« ;»ii0 %a% 
,?>aK9iMS ^o^av'S^rtj olitc) #»?>%• Via -Stf^bmei v^ ta4^m^l**h 9iai 

•i/gi* -tf-v "Sole's^ oi nJtot *»* i>®/.i,4*^ 8J3iS lljl^tUaX'i 

,»»Uii6 HAS 



Jat&es K. li(iriQ!i.t,o and tii^c defendant. Tiie repxe&eutaticna aX< 
Xeg&'d vo heve been fftlee concerned taxee for the year li^l5, 
v^oli plaititiff cXaima ohouXd hnvc been prorated from Jsuiu^/ry 
1» 19X5, to this dute of the cXofaing of the transaction, and 
which would account to about iao in favor of plaintiff; and 
the further repreaentation that there wouXd be no extra 
chRrge for a mortgage of |S,750, whereinis, it in cXaisiied* an 
•xpenae in UiiQ regard amounting to iX50 was to be Qi^ade. Th« 
amount of $5,750 referred to in tne ataiement of claim «Ti» 
d«ntly covers the mortga^ea of ^4, COO and ^X,75c recited in 
the contract, fie think the finding and JuaH,si6nt fire contrary 
to the (svidenoe and the law applicable thereto, 1 

It s«ezQ» that plaintiff ia by birth an Italian 
and had at th^ time: of tnia tranaactiun lived in Ukxa country 
ten ycarsi. iie cXaiais that he did not uriderstand the Knt^^lish 
language, Navigato, who procured plaintiff* a signature to 
the contract, $»poke the italian language, mm it is in evi- 
dence that at Ui*;' ti/te the contract '»sa aigned the parties 
present apoKe in Italian and not in Engliah. Il&xntiff paid 
the earnest isoney to Savigato and not to defendant, and ne 
I)aid it at the inetf^nce of l<avigato at the tiaie nc aigned the 
contract. 

hJeither in the evidence nor in the stnteffient of 
olaim doc3 it appcror thHt any subterfuge was resorted to 
to prevent plaintiff from fully understanding the toruijj of 
the contract which he 8lgnod.~? Defendant did not speak 
Italian at the signing of the contract and it uuti^s not appear 
that fie could ispoak tnat lang^iage. liOr is it ciaxxbcid m tae 
evidence tXiiit defenu«.nt ir.ade any representation to plaintiff 
wnion inducer hiai to sign tnc contract nor any stRteaient in 
relation to it or it^ terma contrary to such teraaa. Hot dows 



iM aaoiar«4fn«49d^si9i out .J^A4bn«>1:»^ 
. btm ;Vt£iai^lii Is iav.«{"t Mi Q^^ SisM-B <si ^uusaaa hleam A^is^ 

|~1 oiaT«ii» <»ltfsoi;C^q« w#I s'fit fcrt« »^#AiM'«iio' -..'jr 

-lY© si mi ik ham «»^j|;s«^8fu^i ««ii«t.a^i »M n:im^ «ioi»i(*«»o sil* 
tui tarn tS^ikhii9t^Ss 'd# ;^0^> »i{x; o$ja,i^j:r^W «t^ -^atSmifwtnv^ wtts 



It aj>pear that plaintiff interrogated defendant regarding the 
terms of the contract.^ There is nothing in either tiie statement 
of claim or in tiie evidence in tuis record waich justifies 
the inference that fraud or fraudulent conduct v^as resorted 
to hy defendant or t/*oae repreaentint, him in the i»atter to 
induce plaintiff to execute the contract, Keither fraud 
in fact nor fraud in law is inferable from the proofs in the 
record. 

The X'epreaentation;* clfti/std to be frauaulent 
relate to the tjiixcs and the expense of the two mort^iagea 
provided for in the contract; we roicAra \.tieui aa being oore 
in the nfiture of proaiaes to be earriea out in the future, 
than ae rejresentationa of any exi»Lent fact, i>uc:^ repre- 
sentations, if £aade, vsrould not constitute fraud, even 
thcu^th plaintiff waa induced to enter into the agreement 
relying upon auct; representations, ua^ v, Inveatmgnt Co ., 
153 ill, a95. 

It la not sufficient to allege fraud. Fraud 
fliuat be jroven like any ether fact, and the actes or things 
doDf which in law constitute fraud muat be } roveii by a ^.re- 
ponderance of the evidence, tht 3am> aa any other material 
fact in a iuit at law, Uc>.ennan^ ^« kickelberry, ki4«j jll, 
117, 

Fraud lii never preauiiied, tVhen trarias.ctione 
fljay be fnirly reconciled witn honesty and ihiii the weight 
of the; evidcr.ce fr.vcra an honc^at iiotive, the conclusion of 
integrity euould uiwaya be adopted, ""he contract iii.re- in- 
vclvc-U, in tiit lij;uL of the tcBtifcony cxprf o-;ea t:; -:• ncnest 
intention of the parties and their agreement, &.nd cannot 
therefore be aaid to be tainted with fraud, 

He fiOld the rlaintiff has neiUier atuted nor 
proven a cause of action a^jainat defendant, and we ther«- 



••iti#)iiii, dttiiixi btof"' ,..,. .^.:.. ..,,.- . ...,-. ...... ... «... — 

&i«»t^ .iiMAttl agsila odt xr^^jitjilii^is i»£i si ^1 



fore re-yeroe the Judtyment of tii® Municipal Court and enter a 

Ju(iit»ent in ti:il3 Court of nil capiat and for costs against 
plaintiff. 

HSYEKSKD WITH Jl;I>CStl«T 0? ^^ Ca> lAl ^ 



a« A 



^Ss* ka& ituMO JU*«i;toifl*fSis »ski "to jrnsiuat-ifcsit ^M »«4*f»'s: »»at 






316 - ii2271 



i^PWAHD i"". LA#E,hNCE, doing 
buainess as LA'W/liOB 

Appellant a, / ) 




H 



y^^\ 



T». 



*iJJ.lAIfc W&KDJJACIL and 

ClJAEL£ia JL.\>:. WEi-iDKAGEL, 

Appall e|iB 



doing bUJjiQe&» aa ':^ :f:J!<X)JttlAG 





i^i-EAL PllOk teUtilCllAL SOUKT 
0? ClilCAao, 






fell. JUanCI. fi01,,lJ&Jirr;ELIVjEIiEB TiiS ei'lKlOJ-; Oi' THIi CDUK?. 



V This l3 ar. appeal fro^. a judf.jiient of ni l capiat 
and for couts in j-». trial before Uie iiunicipal court .^itx^out 
the intervention of » jurj. 

The facts involTed »re, t,uat defRndanta nad a 
contract ^vith plaintiffs for certain structural stusel work 
at sterling, in thla iittate, under waich plaintiff a were ou- 

thorized to retain out of any aioueyss due defendanti^ at «ny 
tin»e ouffioient to inueiiunify plaintiffs agoinat any claim 
or lien for waich taey or taeir property aiigiit be liable, wn 
lioveinber '.<i4, liJiX, one David c'Keefe threatened, a suit stt law 
against plaintiff 8 for perBcm«l injuries claimed to iiave c een 
ouffered in ami f^bout the erection by defendants of the 
structural isteel work for pluintiffs, ilitintiffs claimed 
the rifiit to retain about ^•4,W(jO due deffsndants to Ra^ftit the 
reault of 'Kcefe'e tarentened suit, iefendants not only 
denied liability, but r1j20 tne ri^tit of plaintiffc to retain 
the money then due them. The partiea to ti>is euit i>«ttled 
thi£i controversy by defendants giving to piRiUtiffo a bond 
of indemnity in the penalty of H*"^ ^0, conditioned ti.at de- 
fen.ants itiiould ncld plnxntiffe harirdeas from and agj^inst all 
liability for personal injuries auatained by any and all per- 



xvs.:^ .. H'lz 



,Mrv.;i;K- ^-;vj 




tmmat\Ji!'i.ik. 






T Ai A C* 






-fc-« •'itt« »t'|4;r«iAl^, ac^iii">.w i«*i»« ,»'^«tii »ii^* ai ,aaiX^fe-'- .♦« 
oft»u 9WIUL «^ fcsau.'a» iBifJt-iJtft«i Jl'rtif?o©ie»<j xxi'i am,.t<aifli<i i(t)il«:i|« 



eons as the result of tiae oareleasneits or negligence of 
defenrianta, their a^sentu or ei.-i.pl uyees, in and about Vae 
prrfonuanoe by detfend&nts uf tneir cuntract with pXaxt^- 
tiffut agreeing tc pay plaintiffs •stil (laitagee rwsuitlng 
or ari&ing from aucii negligence, wiilcii sa&y Jsereaft^r be 
aosesued against Uxem in »ny action brougiit by any uucti 
person or persons, then tui a obligation tc be vuid," oie, 
G'Eeefe, true to biif tiareet, sued plftititiflie in ux<b Circuit 
Court of Whiteside counts for dai^nert^s for the personfiil in- 
jury wntch he Gl"i*?i<'Hl he suffereii wnile enf/jged about tne 
structural at-s^l ?rork being «rtjcted by def endjants under 
t'ueir contract with plaintiff**. .-, laintiff a viefena«ct tna 
C'Keisfe suit succeosfully and thia auit ia instituted 
in debt upon the inaeanity ^ond to«r©inbGfore ref^rrisd to, 
in nn effort to recovor fror^i dsffinda/ito sttarney'a fees, 
witness fees, ami otiiar expenses paid by plaintiffs in 
their succegaful dtfen^e of tiie i^'Keefe tjuit, >ntti ii.t?;rest 
upon all of aucJQ disbursei-pnts. The stiorney of defendants 
easlsted in the defentse of the <>^i\Qef9 suit by iidYiding 
plaintiffs* attorney reg?-rainti the ; ler^dinga nnd, at one 
tiiCtt, as to tue. advisiifcili ty of procuring a continuance, fil ao 
aa to the advisabiJity of eif^jJoying 3<\diti,}£Uil counsel to 
help in ti.p trit:l of the case end tho propriety of procuring 
medical testimony An the theory tr.at ;;'Ke«fe waa Jtalinifrering, 
Defendants* attorney vsb a.' yo present at th^^ trial, although 
ho took no active pnrt in it. He had Jtiuii th«? ^ingiish bar 
ter;i.8 a "wntching brief," It aljo appears th/^t in a jsotion 
to instruct a vsrdlct for ;lajntiffs in thii» ,.uit, defendants 
in the L'Kt?tf(j auit, the nf-.; € of aefendants' r'ttornty was 
coupled witn ttjose of pirA4.iitit f s* attorneys, >fttr the ver- 
dict of the jury in favor of i-lointiffs wos returned, de- 



ii©wii! ^tU'i-Krf .Tii^^oo'itf it^iiJ^a -%.% -M ^««(i»:^# \fc4»»jaft«e4» 

■ *i4^e^ilist^i•» "«1;"li;?wli»j:^^: ^©itiJiti^l^ iiitlw iJ'aattfaoo '' 

aaiiiioo'f-i, *t> t^dixa»5K2 ffl«l#, fcCT,«i »^.«'0 8,4^^ -tfl! Lcii's;*: 'f ,it:' ■«!! ^i^'»:^^ 



/•ndants' lawyer wrote plaintiffs' attorney & letter of 
congratulation, exjre8»ing his wonder whether the verdict 
was baaed on Un" legal question or on the fnct that 
O'Ke'Qfe was "sha^irMing,*' 



The contract betweeri tue pnrties and the bond 
of Indeianity were two different transactiono, iflaen the 
toond w«6 given ami accepted and the aoncy due under the 
contract to defencJants waa pnid to thcni, that contract and 
»11 its conditions were eatiafied anti the relations of the 
parties thereunder settled and ended. The rigJit to retnin 
the ifloney due under the terais of th^ contract until the 
outcome of the C 'Keef e Uireatened liti^^ntion* waa !,^«ived 
«nd the bond of indemnity in auit substituted in ita place. 
Thereafter the rignts of the i-.artieo njust be atoeasured by 
the conditions of the bond. 

J'lo thing can be read into th?^ bond wiiicii does 
not actually appear in it or that, ia not wnrraanted by le- 
gal ifitprpretation of the language uaed to express tii© 
intention of the parties, wiaci* intention lauat bs gathered 
from such language. If plaintiffs had desired to have the 
bond cover their coatsi m\<u expenses in defending the 
O'Keefe or Buy oUicr auit, and Uefendanta had been willing 
to yield to auca desire, a ault&ble covenant to limt effect 
could hsve been inserted. Liability c/mnot be extended 
by construction. By ihe covenants of the bond the parties 
thereto are bound, *jhe trier the canon of const ruction con- 
tended for by pl^iiitiffs, - th^t the conditiona of the bond 
be construed most favorably to plaintiffs because the bond 
was drawn by defendBnts and proffered by them to pifiintiffs 
or the reasonable interpretotion of the words fcund in the 
bond b& indulged, tnr' result vtil'i be the some. 



-»i 1** 6»*nj««t;«*r 5«n si . fi fll' ^m^vf^*i^-tMu$9a tan 

tHtdiiitixit a«f iami«o it*i.*l«fcij ,feii»4'*c.>s«l ttm^ti ev«rf felwoai 
fcnorf •cur vvflMo^ itit^tt^iAa:^ iii xliim&tBt jiftO'it ae-ijajsi:.. 



-4- 



Tho covenant is Ilrait«/d to "all daasagoo resulting 
or arieing from ouch negligence wiiich Bay hereafter "be 
aasfiaaad a^alns* them in >my action brought by imy such 
pereon or p«ti"80ns«" Ho dj>jmageB have been aBaeaaed oi^Binst 
plaintiffe; on tiie contrary, in the O'Keefe Cfioe the verdict 
and judgment exculpate then froia <l«iaagR8« e do not find 
«jnything in *Jic conduct of defondr^nts th t would warrant 
UB in holding that they had put my other or different 
interpretation upon tho conditions of thn bond than the 
law wauld but for auch conduct place thereon. It wnc to 
the interest of the defeaidHnts to do all legitimately in 
thtir poiscr to d^r'feat tho ction of O'Keefe againut 
plaintiffs, because if a judgment h sd gone againnt plaintiffs 
the tefandanta w^uld have be??n liabla under their bond to 
pay the aiaount of the bond within the limit of its pf:>nnlty. 
To prevent O'Keofe froni recovering a judgment against 
plaintiffs was the sole purpose of defemdanta' interest and 
efforts. By their joint yfforta they succeiidad. That 
succtiSQ satisfiea the condition of the bond and absolveo 
defendante froM all liability thereunder. 

The action of the trial judge in r.-fuaing to hold 
38 law aj).;licabie to the c oe the propositions of law 
tendered by plaintiffs was without error. The doctrine of 
eotoppel was not invokable again >t fief endsmte. The contract, 
as her';tofore stated, vvas out of the cai5e. The o^jllg tions 
of the contract and bond were diseimilar. Hach stood 
separate and apart from the other and sjubserved lioparate 'md 
distinct purposes. 

fhere is no reversible error in thifl rocord, and 
the judgment of the Municipal Court is jaffirrned. 



J-atsj^^sT)-!^ "STft ^'<iM«' ^mr, .t^rq fi.fj/i , v^s-lC* -if^M ■^t^iil<&U fit sta 
9i !t«v #1 *gt&'&tii>iU "fi'.'hlq^r^Mmmi ^&m tGt $ui€ biiHyw Wii 

oi t?f!0,f ui ':>*?# %*fti$siw »X«>ai inmi ^vxid M«.*.»^«*ftw«»ir«tt. : -ai 
feX«i{ oi- :fefJi»t'"ii'i isi fes&KL •to^'z^ >i*'? 1:*> a©it»« a;^ 

.bio'a*'* «i|<br tji «ic«r^A^ BXtf|^«-«-*t'^:ft "Oct ■«! ■»1C*•v:•i■'' 



4«*.»^/ (J . I 






I Also Ap'^^tlm-iff ) 



^ y U i 

V TSsif? ap|5t«al >s-5ijs i»^.!te«f« ft»«^. an oir^er o-f the 

Tlbtt ctfuatioFi iiimlm^4. is that t-h» &mr''l%^,mmt ^ &« €tt:r 
•n*©A«iEwr«fy, fend 0n daf-oBlt ^ith; ther Ls !;:./>I3© rtt^ei ".'riSEt 

Yassacnusetts Bonding^S: Inaur$,noa Co . , EquitaBle Surety 
_ , Co., IXlinois Surety Co., GIoDe Imdemnxtf Qo.. . 

Fidelity <''<!m^mr/ tt^. nK^mmt^ a&r'tal'/i J>^-3^« a^s i®iaf-eil^;s» 
?5a^ ^, %P\4t tM<^ Citf flt;5«inifi^ flsrtJ>t5,r* s^jojjrity to l'?imii"d 

wM«>i At t%ti% ilwe si^m*9itnt!^f''. t** posse f^J^o^nOf!. Tr ^e:^,^!!^^©© 

.,..;.. n>>o«3t fC^SO^OOfs, Jwr^ JS, 1914, tJ».tt banlr cl >:««<! Its 
aoore, ».'«TJG 1,S» Sf'M, » Mil •!ms' fil<t:-<^ irs ^h?* '"iireiMif t oourt 

s'. ...1 tM fellowlng; ^y* It« tpej^iswrer tlj»r'*'>por. *?«• 

nand^j-fl of tMn :^iir»tt,es on tl*o ba-;i:*a /fecssd a r^ttim of th# 



Q:»A,I0 6i 



<$ w^mfl 



i't^' 






•mL 



fall ftKOuat ffif tte« t^^f^^Ot 

tb© c?th©r soir^tif^e on its ^©ndsj in ■^srhish Ifc e^t tjis t^is 
glirl.»tg «>f th» l»cM« fe^r tte bar;??* J.t«J ©'9fa liaMlity as? «*isr«'%T^ 
ani. tfcis re©©lii>t ^:»f ©«s»5^ttl#® Ijy %tm ©it?' ti»©«/.,-isir$r? It effssr 
te pa^' tit® City ^-^f ilhti»m Um ^.^iisiasm nmm^-nl f©r whi&h it wa«! 

th® Pity tc iK, p^c^©rtli3«at49> part of tl^c* ®©«?<5aritl.'*j^^ • T<5 tM??. 
Mil aisBfSf®!*^ t*©-!'®! fiX>asi. by tli,^ Sity, tisf reaetir^F for tM 

Mil *4itr«h St, tia^^f in ^Ml©!'; M W^f^^ tS®'** VidMcl ,T* Mpm# 
Oltf fre&j5\?r«fry Sii'^fei-. %»«• r«siuir@^ t<5 <|)^li'y)?vr tt Blr^ fill the 

bill in its© K^^rSfjr €«mri* te ^,1©I'^-. !» ^^e^t ^sp tfea ettt^rt 
hAt^t the t^lsln^ iit iirsd®t5i5ifsrimg tMf^ricl.R, th® cbi&i»iin|!; tMt 

»«fer'*3^teii t--^-^ th© Citf *# lr<t«i»tjst if?, tfe* tseos^rltlc-© it*3 that 
tM Iwftfe' afs^ its r«j©#l^«sr tJll5,.iss«i'3 nf^ i«t«*r0t*t lis tfe® easa?©- 
"=?# aelrtNt tJ»j.t the c©«.rl d«i«r««> t.Jwt Uw Ifeimk "r H© r«?f««lv«jr 

piAf 's*i,at«»ir«r miK •Kl.glst is® ^Uft- his: &« -.It,? "■'■p«jaf.«i*<&r^ f!mt 

the proe^cdae en tM balanfl** ->f f.fcv lM»!yt#'5Kv>?><'> •"''«« tl^,© 
01%::*; <*■•?' v-fei<a.='!^*> *V©.^r till*?- ham^k-i S'M ©*•>« r5.i«»-f»T>f^iil©n f>f thi!> 

T^iffci ^« <Ut«ri'-.lt»»dl bv- i>i« oi©wrt» rhie feil3 r^i^® th«^ :o«i!h»yy» 






..-»«»» *»<M:i 



piMrtl<>a d«fer!4&?st,. &« W91X fie th^ r^O'^i^^r for th*" tmnk^ 
A!o,»«^.itfv. «r«r€f iStflY tiJ€>4^ arf4 1b ihliS ««!% ^,l»o> t^he r*>e«lv'jir 
fll»# «. e?^^ bill • ceni?.«i.!«lng tfee ks3rc? »ll<?!f5atioin0 m%fk pr&^&r 

^f i^^ixf^m^ $vip^%j Osfff:1!%t?s5? Vr City ef Chlea.^^ Vansl:; S*** 
WW, rXfrniif I^F lea-T© of e«»s3ft. smmy^f^.t^^ Sils Mil fev Itts^irt- 
twj*: *• jii*av©r f*r!9r tii® ftimdiwtjiKsnt of a r^so^iv-sr P-2M.SE!;*' 11*2. • 

ta Siidjt.* Bt^fesut Tns&i 8rm» ••.•.ayirigs B&Kl:^, took this xvi^»til *Y 

In vleis' ef tli$ fa^t t-Mt t!5-«? o«s^5i^lalraist*j? terts of 
offie© hRil ?T.«rttire^. s and tl^t I*© ^aa» si th© ti?»^ cf th€ ^'-rstr?.' 

ItJfts iw «Hi«h h^v liM no iiitfsr®0t» .pttPsf5m»l ct Rf filial, th® 

a.'5>]pclis.tTEirmi ©f a reec'ivssr' w;.vb' Ksec«esiuy.'? fr;>r the ^r-opfsp T-ro- 
teotl^n of tli«! f>.*t?|>eXIi*?xt as5 htuH a^ that of tfe® ^'i^t^fXle:^ 

11^1^ "itic lipiKsintssart of the re^^Jv.'sr ■*•! thotxt r-^5«ri5rii*.f^ fee 
tHlfe iff ini^s^&t in tlie 6sNSi^Hil«i&» \x- A.lVi'&i^mn tiu&titior. 



•Jjlw, 



M; 



i>IVt»»»««^ 



Qxxid- :&ooi 



mevlnfr |«rtl©i». Tt nm oWi.cn&l^ te the a<lr&ntag© <3.f all 

b« tftk«^« out af t-h© .h&«sdc ©f ers trntfcMeS ^tal^f—hfsl'-l^i* ait^ 
placed i?5 tb® feaM© ©f ft ree^-l-yt-f tsphe^ ir^uld i^eaurc' th® in- 

all tlilfiits i^tit>3«et to ihr «3ir«etl©n» ot ifce orn^rt. ''"h^m 
cirtHMMi'Uinem- ©learlj' ©one it tot,©?! ''}?h5>c?5 ©jws^*,,'-* rflthln ths 
BKumlng ef th®i ijtatut-*, f<?!p the apwir-lf^^rst of a r^<;lT«r 
wltJscwt r&sttlriti!?* t-ht ssOTriisi; if>a,Tt.i&j? t>^ 5?ivc g. ^cod* ••-or 

trllsuiml tc ad,1«^i©att th# rlrMs cpf tht mrtlee tc the ffi<i-» 

e<suTt 0h««l<^ «-z» sffeotisH not ar^pclnt a re««>i. *«'««•» ■l:'.® ^erjtro- 

rwpeartor {l^^^tart, atia !te lupi^.s,!!®-!.!©?! -^sf tbo ^•?p,rtioylmy cor?- 

tr^pjr, h®, stftej* fms3w«rt83|| tb:^ original Milt f!l<(?d ''\i4i e>r«re.g( 
bill ir Whlaf- he s.«JeM o^ffirtrntlv© r^ll«^f * ::Ui lis/cl ih^^ 

tion^ it ^ftJWld still hm€i h^^n iha 4-uty <^f t^-<? (•jotirt %<*■ T>r©- 
tt«t. tfe«' «'«;fe30«Jt'-?j^^»t-t©r of the litlmti<»?? imtil tMrt qit.30stli:w 

^HBtitm. "belong to the Vanlr, and t,hat, th«>xv5for«, a x»ecolt?i?r 

««|^t not i<> ^'••*■' ^-^-^n arpol»tM» '-e st"« urmblfe t.-^ agr^'e '=^-ith 
thlo eowtentic- . • ^ lb© i^aeen tJ5;.it th® ^,':tioi?tioR «^f the: rif^.ts 
©f ttm i*»rtl«^S'^ «*i»tfe?r it T>r«s>snt«<3 lt»^l.f :in a qu^sstlon ©f 

n©t j>-rop«rlj? determine until f^Jliy Mvlu^d t>v ©o?jr,®^l, e?^ 
tt»iil fwlly «4Tlse4, it wa& fele «uty- t® taJc© n%vp& te r!rer.«5i:*ve 



■<?*£*- #»^'^v ■'■■ ''' 

^i! . -.^-i*?: 'i/i'i^^': ■"■•■:';'-v ■•(■■ , ^M' '^-' 

--•t~s- -V ...... „.^„,.^, i^',.;.- :••.>;'' |';^v;v;^?^'*:' .*^' 'Tr ;•-■;: ;^:v-** .-, 

4 J- 11, :, 



-.5. 

©hane«iX<tt» In a|?-p©lntl?sf> as. r©Oi?lf«r ^ms nofe err©n®c«e. the* 



3HSKH IFFIJ?HEB. 



•«s«> 



9f 



'T'"'^''. ■•■':;";•*; 



^'^y 



337 - 21322. 



AHMIK A', BKAUW et al., ) 

Ap|>ellant8, ) / 

\ / 

▼e. \ ) / CIHCUIT COU?T, 

\ \ / 

\ )/ COOK CoifNTY. 



AppelleiSa. /) 5^, f^, sr\ y ^, ^ ^ 



/ 



MR. PfmalDING JIJ^.^TIOK BATmi^r; DKLIV.'JHKD THK OPISIOJ^ OF mE COtmT. 



Thia appeal is from a decree dismianing for want 
of equity an .'jnendQd bill of complaint filed in a esuit to 
foreclose ji trust deed executed by Hueter and hia wife, 
llinnie, to secure hiB four notes dated aept, 1, 189:?, one 
for $5000 and three for $lDnc each, ^ ' 

jFrhe principal questions presented are, s?£^8 the 
euit barred by the tjtatute of limitations, and w/iS the 
tranaaotion usurious? The decree appears to have been 
entered on an jif f iriaative answer to one or both queotions, 
whereas we think both should be answered in the negntive. 

In our opinion the amended bill, filed Dec, 
24, 1913, does not state a different cause of action 
from that stated in the original bill, filed Jan. 3, 
1913, If, therefore, the finiil paymmt of interest was 
made Feb. C, 190<'j, the suit was brouf,ht within the 
statutory period of ten years. [ 

^ By extension the notes matured .Jept. 1, 190C, 
The semi-annual int' rest of ;;280 wh3 paid regularly up to 
iiept, 1, 1899. On M^rch 1, 1900, $80 was paid !?nd credited, 
''n Feb. 2, 1902, teooO waa paid and applied first, to 
liquidate the accrued interest rxi all the notes to thfit 
date, next, to the payment of the note for $5000 and 



/ 




mm uAH-.-^ 

.YT^rrjO HOOD 



:t^ *Aci 



A A ^■^ 

U U W' 






«iir 






,tmon SIR' -^o l&2|^«?) ^^T cmMi;,i,ig3a, iJSrawmK ssita^ m^ei 



&»« ,G9M ^X .,*ct»S hsiitih as^oa loct sirf o-stso^s ai ^tsijuUV 
■ ■ .(' .floe® OOOX^ tot ©ft-TLcW- JsK??. 000«$ T«t 
^ifcj aav .©'xs bs^iiaa&'Kq ^trnti^aufi lif,qtmai*n^ »iif^ • 

9£f^ 0ixm haa ^awti^eiimll to d^tij-^^ii! d£ft tg^ h6%i£«tf ^Int 

.@»<I bB£k'i ,XXj:cf Det^miffis »jr(^'^ rt^ixtX^ iCKfO fli 

,nC9X ,X ^iif^h bariawA 99ioti Btli aoiurs^ixv x^ ' 
,ba*lh«iro fefus »i«(ir ir- OB?^ .'^ i«X ,X K^n^M oO .«<?ax .i .lq[t-- 



««/« "i^ * _. 



mZ' 



one riote for ||1000» ana tiien to tne reduction of the other 
t^o notea to ^6:56 eaob. | tixich. application v/s.e pr-per, 
capeciany in the absence of any directicn by rhe debtox*. 
[ :.:Qp^on V. - eygr , i90 111. Ictj.J 1 

Beinfc- importuned for interest in the full of 
19C2, Hueter in .ecemter or Jonusiry fcllo«ing gn/e ti-.e 
agent of appQllant, Ariiin .;?. Brand, holder of the not<;s, 
A note for 450 of a. third pfraon payable to the ord^r of, 
ftXkd «ndor8<»d fey, ?^u« ter, 'wuici* w?b c. /Ilea ted on i^eb. ci, 
190.3», ana credited of tirua lAate, of v/uich irueter wti3 notified. 
Tiie record iiacXoaea no agrccfiient tc accei t ^^^^- "C'te i-n 
payment of any part of the aebt, FUid no circi'.fijctt-'.iicee tha.t 
raise a preeuiaption tiiiit it 'mo a:) ta.k.en, | it woald tiiCirs- 
fore be dce;.i5ed ocJiviitic-naX pnyiatnt ctily, (v.h elt&riX:i^t£i .^ton e 
L '^T^'^^^ ££• '*''• ^''- ^^- . ^ Iron '^orks , lii4 iu, GZZ>) and at- yf 
tJtiG date frtit^n It waa cullf?cted. >. n ti.e afete of filing the 
ori£.inal till, tiii>refore, ti.ct atatut*; had uot run. i 

Suetf;r borrowed tlxe mancj to ir;iprt-ve on'.r of the 
lota con^eyad by the trust deed. lie appli^id to on<i 
BlumenUiRl, a mortgage broker, for Vwi loan, p.nd agreed 
to pay hiiii e corataission of i?.|> v.nA llip; rx^eMaee connrcted 
therewith Jiucu ae cx^yrtinint/ abatract, recording, etc. The 
l?#,tte;r subiJilttcd it to one riohael brfji.u, rrlio looked ever 
the property, acce;.ted the security, ana t^-'v^" .blvuaenthal his 
ciieci'- for the :ii-ioui-.t cf the lo.-'iU, ^tiOv-O, iilutiitntiial deciuc-ed 
thexefroti '^^^.i^ for uia t,ui::ii;iuaion i^ixd v*-'id out the baiur.ce 
to iiueter'o cuntractoi' on Rueter'e orAt^-a, iiuetcr 

requeatett ifiUBiehtluil to get an cxtentiion of time us afcrcauid 
on the nctce, v.hiuh v.'aa aonc una foi »5iiich Lt ptiid iilutientJaal 
another ooiiiit.issicn of ^liUC. Ho p.r^-t cf viithti cuii-rjiasioi. was 
received by the lender, Brra>d, Durint; Uie yttpx 16,92 
BlvimenthRl made other ioana for &aid ijratid and h*. coJlccted 



9ar:titBQ »jai JTAfy iaiii:; J).'l>4 a:i)i,;«Mi!iif,«ai»y. «ii*i. «.«l|3t:..L. 
6.J.. 



xa 



-3» 



the interest on the notes in question while aaid Brand 
oimecl them. They became the property of appellant, 
Annin ?. Brand, in 1899, after which the payments therecu 
were marie to the latter' agent. Neither the lender nor 
subsequent owners of the netna received or agreed to receive 
nore than the legal rate of interest thertton. The oom- 
penB.-ttion paid to jlluraenthal for negotiating the loan tuid 
procuring an extension of the time of payment, xas .ccording 
to contract between hint and the borrower, with which the 
lender had no conn ction p-n^l of wiiich he had no iaiowledge« 
The essential facts of this cose are not different froa 
thO(^e in the case of Hoyt et al, v, Pnwtucket Inatitation 



for s avin gs jet si., 110 id. 590, ishich wore held not to 
constitute 0. usurious trrmBaction. (Gee also, Uaataser v, 
3ohmelt2 . 206 id. 560; anford v. Kane , 1S3 id, 199.) \ 

Evidence «'»x> received tending to show that 
Blunehthol had not takan out a liccnHe as required by the 
ordinanoes of the City of Ghic(i50,,_which might be relevant 
if T:iu«enthal waB suing for hia consmiesionB, but which is 
not relevant to the issues here, 

Th re was also evidence that t^ie notes were 
signed .ept. 3, 1893 .'ind dated Jept. 1, 1992 and that the 
original loan waa not paid over to Blumtnthal until Nov. 
10, 1892, but thp-t the interest w- s paid thereon from the 
date of til-'- note. The rucord does not disclose whether the 
lender held the money for Rueter'e use from tho date of the 
note. Tni yrrangera^+nt between him and the lend'^r in that 
respect wah not shown, i^rand agreed to make the loon b fore 
ept. latV If he held the money for Rueter's use from that 
date the t •ananction vis not tainted with usury by paying 
interest from that time. The burden of proving usury was 
on the debtor, and was not established. ( Cobe v. Guyer . 



*>(j •» 



sto^l ' ^ijb- ;taa a'l^;' ©#%:» sslil*^ '$« «?-#^-:!^'*' T»<l?f*^s*s;^ sfPfT 



-4- 



237 id. 516.) Beaidee the intereat, if usurious was paid 
before siaturity and before the transfer of the notes to 
the present holder, ( Culv e r v. rsbqrne, 231 id. 104.) 

The decree wiix be reversed, and the cause is 
remanded I'or entry of a decree on the amendod bill in 
harMony httre^/ith. 



a 






\0 "^ 



411 - 



21398 



JAMES J. RYAN, 

Appellee, 



VB. 



CHICAGO FOUin)RY eOMPAlTY, 
;. corporation, 

Appellant. 



APPiSAL PROI/ 
COUKTY CCUUT, 
GOOK COUNTY. 



200 






MR. PttSblDIKG JU;:,TICK':gAHH]5U D?^IVrI;lKD THK OP Hi ION OP TIK COURT. 



This was a suit in as sump si t, brought in the 
County Court, and brjsed upon an award raacie for appellee 
sgainGt api'ellant under the Workman' b Compensation Act 
of 1911, which was signed by only two of the three 
arbitrators api-ointed thereunder. -V 

Invoking the ooinj on l.iw rule, appellant urges 

that the award was void because not signed by the three 

arbitrators. Section 10 of u?iid act contemplates joint 

xtion by a board of arbitrators appointed thereunder; 

and it is provided in paragraph 9, section 1 of chapter 

131 R. J., relating to the construction of statutes, 

that 

"Words purptffting to give a joint authority 
to three or more public officera or other porsoas 
shaxi bo construed a;j giving such authority to a 
icajority of such officers or persona," 

Construing the Compensation \ct with the aid 
of this section, we think the award wnn authorised. 

It is also contended that the CHse does not 
core© within the clas;; of cases of which the County Court 
has jurisdiction. As that court har. jurisdiction in all 
actions where assumpsit will lie and the damnges do not 



G It' 







I 






U ■ 


zon' 






Jj<\mi) Y1"«ftK)0 




ii 


."STTmrriO j«p(J» 






^ Xl s ,^. \) U 










■'.,m^^^ THtii^CJ'^r oMDiao 



^ ■ ■ ■ \ 

,**9d'fe'*B.*i3 'to :wl^,»«rutisim>3 ©rii^ c».i' :§iaii*A*Xt>t .,,„: .H X£I 

",ano3'S»q; to atoo Til© tiaijc '^o >cii'a.ot«» 
i>i« oii$ ft)ic ^-o.' froii.-..«ws><piOl> stir sniwicTaaoS 

Son «»oi> o«*jo »rf* vforJ* Li^ihiu^^o^ oeija »i il 



-2- 



exceed j;1000 (3ec, 7 County Court Act, Ch, ;57 R. ,>.; and 
Par, 6, Art, 2, h, 79 H. .'•) and aa aaaumpslt 4b a proper 
remedy on an award (McDonald v. Bond, 195 111. 122,) and 
the award declared on v;a8 for leBt) than $1000, and the 
judgment for s;o0l.2ij doos not exceed the amount of the 
award, the point io not well tuken. 

The court properly excluded offers of evidence 
bcKring on the quetition of whether the defendant coinpany 
wne liable under the ..orkmen's uompensation Act, as it 
was not relevant to the issue prenented by the declarj^tion, 
The judgment will be affirmed, 

AFFIRMliD, 



»'•'•• 



hem ;,;, .J7 '^t, ,s.iO ,ioA. iruoO yAiimoO' V .osS) CH)Crt' .^r5s.'5X^ 

.noi^J-atvsioob aft? ^sT Mtftt'&ai^'Sq antrwal »d* ^S *n«"«r^Xa»*x *ea oaw 

.tosatilljs «>«f XXJ!« *fi0«a^i/t »^ 



-\\p 



■s 



23 - 21596 



1SS. P.^QPLiS OF ril5 oTaTjS 
OP ILLI2J0I3, \ 

Defendant in j.rror. 



\ / 

ABRAHAM GLICE, ■; / 

Plaintiff In liTVt. 

\ / 



IIROR TO 

COOK. COUllTY. 



.46 



■R. PH£SlD3IfG JUSTICE BARKS^ DiSLIVj-mEI) THl^: OPHTIOIT OF 7HB C^URT. 

Plaintiff in error v^-f. indicted for l;-rceny r.nd 
receiving stolen property, thcj value of which exceeded fifteen 
dollars. He pleaded not guilty and the case proceeded to 
trial. There appearing to "be a variance, the state's 
attorney asked for a continuance and the defendant for his 
discharge. The court suggested a plea to a misdemeanor if 
the defendant was "willing to take a chance to take a year 
in the House of Correction." t the concluQion of some 
discussion between the judge and the counsel, the attorney 
for defendant remarked, "I think the best tiling, your Honor, 
will be to withdraw the jury,** Thereupon without further 
remarks the court said: "On motion of the defendant, the 
jury withdrawn and the defendant's plea of not guilty with- 
drawn and the defenSant'ti plejti of guilty filtered, arid the 
defendrmt warned and sentenced to the Hnu?>e of Oorrocbion 
for one year and fined one hundred dollars ...il coats.'* 

I No expljmation of the oonBequenoes of the plea of 
guilty (if 7;e asBume one wiii.. iiroperly entered) who aiade by 
the court, jyid no .7itnes,B wab examined ue to the aggrav^;tion 
or mitigat on of the offense. The statute required both. 
(Sec. 4, Div. 13, Criminal code, Krolage v. People . '^^24 111. 



a^ais - fis 



6 



A,l 





f V 
1 


\ : ... 


f'\ ■''"^ 'f« 


^ 





[0 m. 



,THu< ' XJS^ie.. i,;stiiKAS ssxttim, :. 



Jv 



fn*>-*.- V.ft1j^5?ti af{;t Od^ .>!.< t»V«J:fffa»;*^» SiW '^^©Mj'iv. Otf for^J ,i";iXO0 Pitt 



-2- 



456.) If we may asaiirae fr«iBa the bill of exceptions that 
the calling of witneaues ^aa waived, and that defendant 
acquieoced in the entry of a plea of guilty euid a sentence 
to a year's iarprisonment, atill we can not regard the 
court's remarks above quoted as a con^liancc with section 
4, Div. 13 of the Criminal Code requiring that the plea of 
guilty "shall not be entered until the court shall have 
fully explained to the accused the consequences of his plea, " 
especially when the punishment iuiposed exceeded that which 
the c^urt intimated might be given^j^jThe court at one point 
of the discussion referred to tJ^e "maxiraum" penalty, but does 
not appear to have explained to the accused what it was,/ The 
proceeding was too loose to be countenanced as a compliance 
with the statute or a precedent in a case where one is 
deprived of his liberty. Therecord as made by the clerk 
shows a compliance with the statute, but it will not prevail 
as against what is shown in opposition to it in the bill of 
exceptt^a. (^, D, ^ 2, Tyr, j^i* *' Hmidriafi, lOO id. 501; 
MoCh-junay y. l;-£'-?ylo. :L?4 iu . 46.) 

Thcj judgrs.nt will "be i-averaed and -Uia oauua 

RlSViSRSSD AND RBMAKDED. 



MIS'. 



'svs'l Llsidfi i%mt) 9.d^ IkSais h^ttbAsi^ &o' ^ok li^ria*" >j#Xias 
ocitsq Site *« *two©>x£f I jEejvis Sf-d" M^lw *;#9*«ial*if5!i it%&03 .»^^ 






27 - 31257 



OLD ROSE DISTILLIHO COMPANY, / ) 

a corporation, \ ) 

D^endant in ;rr©r/ ) ERROR TO 

\ / ) 



▼ 8. 



/ 



imiflCIPAL COURT 
OF CHICAGO. 



KLIZABJiTH PARKHILLJ. 

Plain tiX'f In 'j^mr 



MR. JUSTICK McDQSALD DELrVilHED THB QPINIOH OF THK COURT. 

^ Defendant In error (plaintiff below), brought an 
action of forcible entry and detainer against plaintiff in 
error (defendant below), for the possession of certain 
premises; plaintiff's right of posoession being based upon 
a lease entered into with one IlcGivem, the owner thereof. 
The court having found the issues for the plaintiff, and 
having entered judgment thereon, defendfmt brings error. 

This suit is the aftermath of a similar proceed^ 
Ing for the posoession of the same premises, brought by the 
said UeOivem against the defendant, wherein the court also 
found against the defendant, which judgment was later 
affirmed by this court upon a writ of error. McGivern v, 
Elizabeth Parkhill , 111. App., Gen. No. 20826. 

It is urged that during the pendency of the writ 
of error in McGivern v. Parlchill . supra , the present action 
should have been abated. Vlt is a sufficient answer thereto 
to aay that this quecstion should have been raised in the 
court below, and comes too late iriien raised here for the 
first time. ( Hailman v. Buckmaster , 8 111, 498). Further- 
more, the pendency of a writ of error cannot be invoked to 
abate another similar action unless the former operates as 



Vg,?X^ 



.rm^moii om^ 



\ 















HK I T no 

• ■''■■' 

'.SESos .oK .tioa ,.^q:/* ,xii ^xxi^rfx^^ niiadxsiia. 

ac Of-- • • ;. 



•2- 



a su per s ad eaa . ( HoJllton 7. i.ove , IS 111, 48G}, A 
supereedee.s hriYtn,-?; be^n df>nlcd in Mcaiverr i v. Parkhlll , 
euj)ra, defftndant'g contentiorx that the prosnnt suit, sh-^^uld 
have "be*^ abated is Titho'.^t lasrit. 

In the prtscsnt anticn H. J. Parimill, the hustand 
of the defencJrnt, w'.7 originally the sole defKtndant, Gub- 
sequently hir wife, tho defon -rjit horein, v7f-.w moAe a Joint 
defendant. L^tcr, hcwnver, H. J, Pr^-rKhill »ra« dismloBcd, and 
the caf3C prcco-doc againnt t^^^ defendant alone. It is urged 
that this substitution of parties dc>f rtndsiit cone tl tut im: a 
nc* ciuGe of :^ctior.» ruch, however, is not th<? lar*', 
?:'6trcpollt.gtri Xns , Co . v. People . 2^9 111, '71', Thomas v. Fame 
Ins . £0.^ iro III, Qi. 

nofondaBt h&.a also raleed other X'<'in'fcSs which 
were adjudicated in l/cGlvem v, I'&rkhill t 3upr» , end hence 
they viill not bo oonRidsred here. 

Finding no "eversible error, th« judgmont will 
bft tiff ii:-liU'^d. 

ATFIIfJJBD. 



•s* 



»X«? ♦XX.i snx ^.or; .gfd 



44 - 21361 



MARY HOEFT, 

Def Allidaiit in ii^rroir, / 

/ ) mmoH TO 

) 



1>" 



t» / ) CIRCUIT COURT, 

COOK COIjWTY. 



I 



JOHS HOivFT, \ / 

Plaintiff la Tsrriir, 

\ / 

MR. JU .TICK MClXmALB BBLIVJmiSD IHE OPINION 0? THK CrURT, 




A I 



v/On July 10, 1911, defendant in error (complainant 
below), was granted a default decree of divorce, on the 
ground of desertion. Oa the day the sold decree wub 
entered, plaintiff in error (defendant below), presented 
a motion to set aaide the deoree, and for leave to file 
his answer, which said motinn waa entered of nscord end 
continued. On March 4, 1912 defendant presented his sworn 
anower to the bill and an affidavit in support of said 
motion. The court overruled said saotlon, nnd to review 
this action of the court, this vwit of error hi^a been 
prosecuted. 

It is contended by the def (rndsnt that the court, 
in overruling said moticsn, abused its discretion. Under- 
lying this contention is the claim of the defendant that 
his affidavit and sworn anBwer set forth a meritorious 
defense to coa^lainant's bill, ' e cannot agree? rith 
this content ion r~] 

The answer filed b^ def endfoit denied the wilful 
desertion and its continuanco without reaBonable cause, as 
set forth in the bilX. -aid answer admits, however, that 
the defendant had been living separate and apart from the 
complainant from th*» date of desertion alleged in the bill 






li:?,£t " hk 






> 






-r>t/ 






fei'ij^ss "■t«>'"'ij^q^«r»'«-' j«^\.#ii'*»l>i;1;1:« fi^s .fern IJAW -^^W' t# •^■awaa* 



•2» 



(H«Y«iriber 4, 1907) to March 4, 1913, the dat« the affidarlt 
and answer were presoited to the court and the motion denied. 
Defendant, In his aniswer, seeks to justify his long absence 
fren his wife, en the ground that she had caused his arrest 
•n a charge of disorderly ccmduct; th t when that suit was 
nolle prouned, the Justice of the peace hefere vhom it wae 
pending, warned hia (defendant) that complainant wanted hisi 
to stay away froa her. \ .>ttch action on the part of the said 

Justice of the peace, not shown to have been concurred in by 

^ defendant '^a 

the cosq>lainant affords no Justification for/continued 

— I 
absence. / jJef andant*u answer further alleged that prior to 

the desertion in question complainant^ s adult s^ns had 

threatened to take his life if he did not leave the home of 

coEsplainant, after wiueh he did leave and stayed away for 

soBie time, believing that said threats would be carried out; 

that coay}lainant knew cf »aid treats, and consequently had 

her ivo sons arr rated; that following hia arrest of ^Jovember 

4, 1907 he fc<^red a renewal of hostilities on the part of 

complainant's aaid adult sons; that because of the fear of 

thcae sons and the warning of the court, he stayed away.V '^ch 

conduct cffl the part of h(5r children can not be attributed to 

the coxsplainant unlesu it be 3ho«n ta.t she aided and abetted 

therein. The answer itself indicates thi^.t such was not the 

case, for it alleges that oomplainsmt had caused the arrest 

•f her two sons because of theue threats laade againet defendant. 

From a careful exajnination of the record, we are 

unable to say thut the court abused its discretion in over* 

rulings isf endfnt'ii motion to vacate the Jecree, &nd for lenve 

to file the jinawer in question. .cnerdingly the decree will 

be affirmed. 



^' 



8j»* *i«e ^«iit sa»l^?-' *«i^ ;^&iJ§,«S)a t-£'SS'^«*Jtfc I'* ^■^'m^ a a& 
asm ^i m&iisK es»lsrf «»«»<j iSfSt 1:® »ittjt^&»% »j# jl^js»«i5t »iX©a 

bias fwrti' ^^ #^»?? s-# ci?«>. «<»4*«»* ii?>.<^i.^ ;' • isii sm%t ym& %046 •# 
Ita ^^;»^ ess? .^eis mi9iM^«^^ t* IJa**)^^'*. A is^^'.*-^ .arf ?0«i ,/> 



SaS - 21372 



\ 



BD'tflH J. BOVEn, Jr., et pi., ) 

Appellants, ) I 

) liSpEAL 7R0U 

V8. \ 1 /ciRCTJlT crimT, 



KUOSIfB iJ. PliQc, 




COOK OOUK'IT, 



Appellee c \ ) i>. fl fl T.Ar, O i 



M. JUJ^TICH; KCDOdAU) DFJ,IV1?RK1-) THE OPBildl 0? THE C^TIT^T. 

jij>|rGll«ntB-^4cofflplainantB Itb Iowj.^ - filed n l>ill to 
restriiin api5ierl"l«isi .i^ugene ,; , i-ike Icne of thp drfmdants 
"below^ froBs entering judgreont upon a noto for ^l,sr>0, dated 
?e*bruai'y 1, 1908, due six raontlis after -lato, tsith interest 
nt t^ rate of 6% per annum from dat«?. By stipuli'tion, 
d «f en (i an t , F i kc , iihSffl" wg'-B!rarr~fei?y^lni7TeF~HeWIt3i o t^ ks t lie 
^«r<i.Bt- coi&pltilnfiixtj was puraitted to file a crnsB*'hili in stiid 
oiiUBe, Tfclierein he prayed thi.t a decree be rendered in his 
faTor for the amount due him on the note in question, 
Aliegretti X^^ other d jenduat IrwXOWV", wa?; di^jsistied from 
the suit by consent of the psrtis». Uoon a hearing of the 
cauBo thus conaolidated, tiio chsmcellor found the isjKues for 
the nroBb« complainant, tind entered a decree in his favor for 
the Bura of ;?1,776, being the tueount tiien due on Bftid note, 
and diBMiatJQd complainants* bilx for w?int of equity. From 
this decree, complainants appeal, 

?.y virtue of a l«»*r,e dated January 29, 1907, 
between tJie cross- oomplainant and Aliegretti, the latter hud 
a ten-year leasenold on certain premises therein mentioned, 
located in the ity of Chicji|f!:o. About the time of the 
execution of said lease, Aliegretti organized a corpor tion 
bearing his n«me, to which he forthwith aseigned the lense 



i ■ ■^.,w^ 



av 






^ ^ -^ UV v^^^ / 



#a«Tt#?c».-?: r^Hi^ .ftrf's/.' uovtl'?! efi^ni*'''^ J^*' 






.X*«6ci;<r« ftrf'fw«f?4l><X«3WK!»a ^A^tcab elift 



-2« 



in question. Tsy >m nvrnnt^Qmnnt \»lth Ml««f5retti, tha 
coaaplain^ntB ettbsequently bfjcanK? otockhold<5rs of tha 
Allegretti company. 

The note in question was r^ignod by copip3.ainantB 
and Allegr«?tti, as mak'^ra, nnd wa« f^iven for accrued rieast 
wh3.ch the cnmpwny owed th© ornsn-nojpnlfiinant '.wli'r th'^ 
leace hereinabove mentioned. Prior to the maturity of said 
note, the '^rtjapiainantB tr»n3f«rr*?d their fcitccV. in tiatd 
coa^jany to Ailsf^r^tti^ who, in cocRicUir^ticr tjii^refor, 
eigreed, i-n^jir «;\i^5, to inrtwrmlfy an^. eavft h;irRie£;B naid 
ooBp.L&intmta from Xiribiiity on 8p.id roto. 

?AfrT?^-iwt*Sx/eoTit(?nd thr^t. thf» cross- cowplriinnrit was 
fully inforruert of the Inet ah«ve-Tf=r:t.ioned txrraowjir.t nnd 
A»H«nte(l thereto; that wbw. t>iO note in ftueftinn rrrturcd or 
August 1» 190», croR?.«cofg>l!»irRnt ?vA Alle^ratti, ^rithnut 
the kno«»ler.;-« or consent of the Hpr;M3.?!.Rt s, «rt.«rf:ii Into a 
binding «f;r«'^»(«it, extf?ndiricr th<! ti?*e of payment thsrsof 
for the ip-^'iof' <^^ '>'^^- yer-^-" fror? «r.ic< cl^te, by rs; 5?on thereof 
the frft^i<t- j ie p eiki nnt b were relss aed frow liability. The 



cshancellor founrf th? t ©ua-aaafii:isa*« nad failed to oatabliah, 
by a prepondtriufica of the evi )ence, that a binding extsnsion 
ugre^raent had been entered into, and it is urgod ■b*t,.^h«- 
a^jf»aXak«»«« thnt auch finding is r.lewXy and nainifaetiy 
againRt the v,'ei ht nf the (*^id-3n5«. 

On bcThslf jf i ho u»p« ^jrtgrt3, Allegretti testified, 
by way of a dep'>altion, that when the nnf? in ^u^:^ti.on b»^cs;i«ic 
due , he had a tnllc \pith cro8e-co!B!pl«inant, In v?" ich he uiJksd 
for an extenaion of time on naid note for ono yenr^ end that 
the crosB-nonplainnnt prmited tiie extension; thist he 
(Allegretti) airreed to keep thie money end pay interest 
thereon, for one ye.^r; thrvt. cro8B-conpl»inant did not r.-ike 
any demand for payment of this note before the end of the 



M*:* 






-s- 



yerrj th; i just 'cufcre -.u^ucit i, 1909 h^i i tuwiTeu a ietter 
frovx erosf-ccttplt' inert, reiativti to t,ht- puyiuett, oi" tltia 
noXf. on /jJGUut firui, to whicli he ret J.isJ ijr. subc.t.s<r>ce, the.t 
he had xecfivec croefi^costfjlu^psffit's Istturi Ui«.t It '»;)iJ.ld be 
impr^DBlToie fcr him to corcpXy -vitt. hi« wishes r'igfrrdins the 
note, "but t-hc't h?.' n^'-'Ulrl l-rlni? An <.£. aasch aa h* nould by the 
first of August, He further teatififti thnt t,)io time of pay- 
TPent of this nota '> ^-> suhssc^usntl/ eitt«aJorl f:*OB! tiff to 
time; fo^t hs prjtci t-n<5 lnt?!r4*s»t, .^n Haid notPr a?t,<»r the first 
ye;.r»ft '*^tan.=5ion, ns' agr.-j'.^d; all of wj;!lch «?«<* without the 
knowleii^o or conjynt of ^te«-«^»r'^irS^rt3 , .^ i 

Edwin J, i-iores.^, ajitJtJj'^r tfit;*©***: on iK-haif oi'^tircp- 
aVyMwLis*4H?', rhc?Jb ti'stiKv-ny -^b tsi-j--". r.ubBBiit«.^ by ^ix^ o? r 
depoi^itiori, corrov-oraVo^J AixCfcrfciti i,n tVu.t he h{r>d 'na<i po 
knoi^ie-iit^c of t.::* ^^iXttTiSricr. agreciiC-nt D6t,>.f:tsr. crociB-eoiiipiainfcnt 
tnd ..iJ.cijretti on the v/i, '-';*'-• sole. ;•♦; tft».iifi<-A f^jther, th?-t 
thtj iir^t inform., tiCR he hfj.d tlua. tii^' u^t* hac i-ot- cet»r paid hy 
Aliegret'-i, cjure fror. his* l-iothej-, aX^ouI four /earo £.2 ter its 
maturity, v,'hen the crotto-coisplaiiiirfit dfe««iide<i payment thereof 
.-aid threiitened suit; that ;aiss5i'6tti «au in a pouition to p^y 
this note at jsriturity, but that since then he h«d becoae r 
bankiTUpt . 

Fx.cdericis M* Bowea, tijiot^xer witness on behalf of 
^M— ^ppaiis«*6, toatified that he had no knowledge until 
June, 191^, thot th<j note tn queation hud not been paid; that 
prior thereto he had had no coni-^uaioatK-jji -.jith croea- 
conpl'j,in£mt, with roferanca to the unpaid note, nor hf.d he 
any Intiaation thut the time of payaant thereof had been 
exterrJed* 

The eross2»cftiapl{i.ln«nt, in hie teutiiiony, ixdmitteU 
that he had ii convorc.oion with ./ile^jretti ■■X the time the 
note in lueatico matured, but denied having granted him an 



••£• 






i.::k<it^'^- 



iQtl 






C'iW* 



. -xwfc' 



jtaiiT. ■ .■■.•■'■ --.-..,.. 

X<f ■• -' - '31^ life 

■^■' >&r iH?^;" - • '■ 






l«<i^ ;&iAq iTi9«)>(!i ;f6f( h 



•■:ii '■>i'\i\ ^i-.Qinii:.! ,>■; Jiyi,-^,, 

../. ^.v-,v -.w #ia^* ,i.Jt^X jjsaut 



.:W+^' ti-. .-,;.. tj- 



'(^X'i £»jt J^^ill^ 



extension of one year on the payment thereof. Ho slao 
tesstif led that urtien the note fell due, "af^fHsiitortB requested 
him to extend the payment thereof. He further denied haying 
received interest for the period for which { tj ppe ^l jbim-te claim 
the note was extended, wnd cienlf>ti «11 knowiedf^e of the fact 
thf t apr!«iiimrtll had no further interest in the husinewB, 
or that one Connell hid intended bocoraing interewted therein. 

The wltneeo :, w. Greenfield, whb attorney for 
Allttgretti in moBt of his dealings with croaa-coraplfiinant 
and U)0 SapjXfll .iants, and hie testioiony was principally with 
reference to what transpired et theae cnnferences. RegBrding 
the agreement of May 1P>, 1908, wherein /vllegrettl agree'? to 
hold the-«5pptrit±HirtB hanalesr: frora eny linhillty, he testified 
fis follows: "Mr, Allegretti and Mr. Pike casie to ray office 
one day, and Mr, Allegretti eaid that Mr, Pike had cowe up 
with him to talk to me about the - trell, u8 they cxpresred 
it, about getting the Bowes out of this buaineeB. « # t^ 
Mr. Pike said tlint he would like very much to tsee the Bowee 
out of tiiat Viuisinees; * « « that he wnuld do all he could to 
aid Mr, /.llegretti in making a success of the 'bueinefflc, and 
that he would do aheolutely nothing father unlesi' the 'riowes 
were out of the business.*' This is in direct contradiction 
of croo a- complainant 'a teatimony upon. this point. 

It further appearo from the evidence, that on 
July 51, 1908 the croas-complainnnt entered into an agree- 
ment whereby the rent nna to be reduced, eoBrjnenoim- July 
1, 19C8, find continuimt until June 30, 1910, provided one 
Jnmes Connell would invest not lesv thfui ^.lOjOOt" cash in 
the comprny. The necosiary citsh wara invcotcd by onncll, 
wid the rent wao aci^ordingly reduced. Conferences were 
hftd »t this time, and ae the note in ouoation wm; about to 



i)»*««j»j.*> -■■^" ,mfb iSi$'t i&tfSiSi .^fii$ ■ 

s»j:«^-l !.iw^^, iSa;i'iSi*< '^iBi%^ M ,i**iri*r>^^'\ 

?j«>sro3- Bi^j^ »*« njf jti'jwia '^'x^v (3rt:rf.*i: tiu<m mi .;imiU . tii-Mjlm «*i - 



•9* 



baoome due, ni^cean-.rlxy the matter of itc payment or 
extension mint have been diucusBcd and some iorriingttaient 
Bade with rcferonco thereto. It Is 3ignifici>nt thatlcroBs- 
coiqplalnant, from ..uguttt 1, 1908, when tlxe note in question 
matured, until juut bofore August 1, 1909, did not roaJse any 
deiaand for payaent of this note, \lt is also a signifioimt 
fact thatj cross- ooroplainant never took up with th«3 8|»p«^l^n'te 
the question of payiaent of this note until .llegretti li^d 
bttcozne inoolvent in June, 1912 ,y The testimony herein above 
set forth, viewed 1ji the light of other facts and circunustanoes 
shown by the record in thie ctteo, which we deew it un» 
necessary to set forth hero, lead© this court to the con* 
elusion that the chancellor*!] finding is maniftintly against 
the prepoadi Tfrnce of the evidence. 

It clearly appearing froa tixQ ovid^ice in this case, 
that tiae cross- conaplainant had Joiowlodge of the agreement 
aade by .dlogretti to eave appeliimts haraiiosa from liability 
on said note, and that he (the cross- complainant ) aoquieuocd 
therein, and it furtlier appearing that aaid cross- ooa^lainant 
Altered into a bin ling contract f»ith ,\llegretti, extending 
the time of payment on uuid note, for one yeur, it follows 
as a matter of law, that the appellmits were relenaed froa 
further liability. Croeoiatm v, ohlleben . 90 111, 537. 

For the reasons hereinabove assigned, the 
decree of the Circuit Court of Co -ik County will be reversed 
end the ' ouao remanded, with directions to enter a decree 
in conformity «ith the prayer of complainants* bill of 
coiiaplaint, 

RiSVilliSED MD RSJtAl^fHiiD WITH DiRKCTICaiS, 



r 



-^.- 



• #ft»»»a^'»"v*» aasdw ^onv bo^mtr^^lk m^^^ dV»if c^aafw ««itm^x« 
*-?r'=-^"*i.'t^s i4 «s^,a ai ^|,' ,@>i&<% till;? te v^fffesw%«« t^'t i»«matii 

^imo *?tt ^ i'sriiiiij »:k^- s^^^^i ,^*3fs2?< ^«6^ t»«f o# "t5^fc«es«»ti 



402 • 31389 



^\V 



H/J^RIKTTB A. INGRAHAM, 
HENRY V. PRKKUAH and JOHN 
V. OILCPmiST, Kxecutors and 
Trustees under the will of 
ORANVILU? 3. INGRAHAM, 
deceased, 

Appellees, 



T8 



JOBW W. MAHINKH aad LTT'-INDA 
W. MARIIIi*iR, Executors of the 
Estate of -PHRAIM MARlHilR, 
deceased, and J. PLATT lJHD<aW00», 
Appellants. / 



^APPEAL FROM 

! CIRCUIT COURT, 

1 COOK CCUHTY. 



) ^ 



X 



\q <J 



3 



MR. Jtf ?1CE llcT)mAXri DI?LIV]'JHEI5 THIS OPIFlQil 07 TIB COURT, 

^ The decree herein appealed from stated sn account 
between the parties hereto, and made final disposition of 
the assets of their Joint Tenture. As this case has been 
reTiewed on sercral previous occasions, it is unnecessary 
to here reiterate the facts. They are sufficiently set 
forth in the following former opinions in the case: Ingraha m 
V. Mariner. 194 111. 269; Mariner v. In^raham, 127 111. App. 
542; id. 127 111. App. 550; id. 230 111. 130; id. 25!) m, 
10». >^ 

It is contended by appellants, that under the 
contract of January 2, 18G9, upon a sale of the property, 
interest on the ^70,000 invested by Ingraham in the joint 
enterprise shtjuld be included only for the purpose of 
determining the profits ac ruing therefrom, but that in 
the event of a loss, this interest item should be excluded; 
that as the decree of the cliancellor includes said interest 
item in determining the amount of the loss, it is erroneous 
in this respeot. 



p.Bs.r>. 



BOk 



mm J^ 



,tHLMD ^lUD«i^ 4 



^'nmj'}^ mo^ 



Q 



fi T 



^^xi^x y y 



fen* stn:f s^otflK.-: 



• illii^£Uiti>'<i>.&^>/'i' 



JS 








.Tmr)0 SH5* ^ B<KEi5!X^ snrt vt^ch^vi 



.m 



aftfliff *J8d 9g^» Bill? e/i .©nar^ft&v tofot ^s> ^iaesa MCi 

.XXI aes .11, j<M5x .xxi msi .^ i«^» .fsAi'Mi'iPs-i .M'-J®*^ 

^ '•■■■■■■■■■■ ■ •■■^- ' .'■•' ■■ ■-•■'■■■ ■■■^*- " ■ -v .4?0X 

,%,*T»qoig: 3d;* ^0 «X«a « iiiO'f^if ,l??<tX ,S "^^stfiKi^ ta ioattaoo 

1« 'J8e<fiar »il* toI: v;Xsw» h&%alt)at%''S himde ©sai'sqrti^-ay 

aiio-^rto-xie at. it ,at:oX srC.J" ^o futfotm erf* afll aiKri i^^sJa «Jt flf«*i 



-2- 



The agreenent of January 2, 1889 prorides, in 

part as foliovs; 

^The said A, J. Cooper, of the 2Bd part, 
being desirous of taking an interest in said land, 
agrees to rrtaio a loan of 430,000 (Thirty Thcueand 
Dollars) at his own expense; also agrees to pay 
interest on aaid loan, and 6;.' on balance of Capi- 
tsJ .,tock to the said Granville . Ingraham; the 
6% on the balance is not required to be paid until 
the sale of oaid land; then that amount to be 
aided to the Capital took, 

"The said Ingrahan of the let part agrees 
to give to said Cooper of the ^d part, half of the 
profits, after adding all expenses and intersat to 
the #1,000 (one thousand dollars) per acre of said 
land.** 

The aforesaid contention of appellants is baaed upon the 
language of the contract hereinabove quoted, vlev^ed in the 
light of the foreKOlng decisions In the case,' 

LOBscE are the antithesis of profits, and both 
ere determined in the same manner, unless otherwioe provided 
by the contract. The lang tage of the contract hereinabove 
quoted exprofi-ly provides tJ\;^t the interest item in question 
ah&ll be included for the purpose of determining profits; 
thert.for«, in the absence of any special provision for the 
determination of losses, it must follow that this oarae basis 
of computation was intended to apply to the losses as well, 
should there be :my. To hold otherwise would lead to con- 
fusion. For instance, let us assume that upon the basis of 
comput'ition contained in the contract, a loss of i>1000 would 
result. If the position of appellants were tenable, the 
interest item of approximately SJ;82,000 would have to be 
slimlneted. ith this Item excluded the transaction would 
show a profit of about $81,000. Clearly, such construction 
is lllogiC£.l and gives rise to inconsistencies; and as we 
find nothing in the contract itself which would lend substance 
to the contention of the appellants on this point, the con- 
clusion is inevitable that their position in untenable. It 



-G- 



a^ oi it.tt«^i?fi ^sidi flsrf* ;&rttv£ *>ij^;« to ^l^e »rf* 

* # * # * * S- * * » -X' * ■» * » » 

ftloisci swJ^e 9 ills ^^U^ «6lXo% .tMrM 

to al«a-f wilt iioc-w ^i&efir a«i«^«J5 mr t^X ,»fiiw;^e«i wt .iSfjXi^*^ 

fcXttow OOQX^ ^« sa^.X « ,t»je'2:#,©o.o ai<|* j^Mt fe©«|*i«^^.«. fsi^i^^ 

®d* ,eX^5itifti!^ ^-aew ar#rtK^X».T^|5j3- |* ..»(!)l#i:ao-^ %v# i.| ,,,^Xii««!ij. 

MiJO'w seoiiQsmtm'st exii i>0 ImXety^f^ tm^^i ztA^ Miff'. mkfi&nlBiil^ 

9m «#} Jbne itt»io^#«j;aA09nX oi ftiilii esTis |ijr& i;<<3«X:»dXXi «Jt 



-3- 



is maintained by appellants that when our uuprene Court 
passed upon this case in 194 111, supra and 230 111. supra , 
construing the con tract, nly profits were anticipated. But 
it expressly held in the 230th 111. that in case of a loss, 
it should be borne pro rata , according to the aaount con- 
tributed by each. The decree upon which the court in the 
290tb. 111. was passing, used the following language: 

"In case there should be no profits realized 
ou» ^t said enterprise, and in case there should not 
be sufficient to repay the capital, interest and ex- 
penditures aforesaid to the respective parties as 
herein announced, that each of the parties shall bear 
his pro rata ahare of losaes incurred, according to 
the contribution made by each," 

Howhere has the Supreme Court indicated that in 

case of a loss the interest iteop in question should be ex- 

eluded, although the foregoing lianguage in the decree makes 

proYision for the apportionment of losses, in the event 

there should be any. In the aSSth 111., our Supreme Court, 

after reaffirming its language in the 230th 111., makes use 

of the following language, p. Ill: "Ai^ter the sale it was 

ascertained that there were no profits to be divided, but, 

instead, a loss of about $168,000." This a#iount ($168,000) 

includes the interest item in question, and while the fore* 

going language may be regarded as dictum, this precise 

({uestion not having been before the court, nevertheless it 

indicates that the view of the .'Supreme Court at that time 

was that on the statement of an account between the parties 

the interest item should be included in determining the losses, 

and we do not fsel Wrirrnnted in holding contrary to this 

intimation especially as it ie not inconsistent with anything 

the court has heretofore said in the oiise* I 

It is urged, by way of cross-error, that interest, 

from the date of sale, should have been allowed u on the 

principal amount of ^48,971.09 found due from appellants to 



tSlSfS. •iJCr MS"foais^J|f® ••^■^■t **®Jt^ fit 'Vt^b 'i»M* R^«Tw fc«9eij< 

xtf^ms^mi 3J«t«©JCXa'!t Sidt* J^«*»tf ^::nlm&)^ turn •iXX fJl^OSS 
^sAJCsss-s »#-l'3:orE«j Off sws &I.woii» wcft'.s«^ *«»;& AI' 

"♦dr.*-*"' '^«f 9Jb«if.i naicTJ.'di'.'sJ'isoci «i(i 
al *4*if* bo^sfSiJtJfaiti: <J"s»n3i «tj3K0l^ia?ft iritis- aa&if »'jr»je6ir«tlS 

««£( e»3£d3iss ,,Ii:x i#0% siii ni: (s^i'sttm^ £>^^ ?j«sii!!n:j:'3;1;js9'X telHb 
<*«cf ,fo»foivli> 5><l oi e^lln'^q osi i)-^sw aii&t^ i»ia^ feoalA^Ts&i^ 

aii-r tiis ij i^yvoXX* ?«•»<? »vsui iiXi^otta ,»iae lit» 5.; .uoil 



• 4* 



appellees. The cont«intion of appellees is predicated upon 
Bee. 2 ch. 74, R, >,, which providen thfit * creditor» shall 
be allowed to r cjoive at the rate of 13^ per annum for all 
■oneys afi.er thijy become due on a*iy bond, bill, promioRory 
note or other inatnment of writing," \/lt will be seen that, 
in ordf^r to come within the foregoing provision of the statute, 
the relationship of debtor and creditor auat exist* The 
#48, 971,09 fotmd by the court to be due irom appellants to 
appellees, was, in fact, duo fron appeiiftnts to • the firm, and 
from the firm to appellees, but, to uso the languase in 
appellees' brief, "aa the same amount saa due fro® the pai'tner- 
ahip to the IngrahfiUE estate, a-d aa there were no partnership 
assets remaining af^er the sale of tne land, the decree ordered 
appellants to pay this svun direct to the Xngraham estate." 
In Lindiey on rartnership, 5tn edition, it in said, p. 4C<;: 
"If the assets are not sufficient to pay the debts and 
liabilities to uon-pij.rtners, the partners muot treat the 
difference as a loss and isoake it up by contributions inter se . 
If the assets are more than sufficienit to pay the debts and 
liabilities of the partnership to r.on-partnero, but ^re not 
sufficient to repay the partners their rospootivs advances, 
the amount of unpaid advances ouight, it is conceived, to be 
treatea as a louio, to be mut like other xosi^es. In sudti a 
case the uavances ought to Le t-eated ug a debt of the firm. 
hut payauie to one of the partners instead of to a stranger. " 
Clearly, therciore, the amount vViutch appeliaxits were decreed 
to pay to appellees, was a firm obligation, and consequently 
the rtiiationahip of debtor and credit nevor existed between 
appelianbb and appelxees, Ve are of the opinion that the 
chancellor properly refused to allov the statutory h^« 

Finding no reversible error, the decree of the circuit 

Court of Cook County will ^e affirmed. 

AFPIRMKD- 



^ <. 

<«^«> 



oj- Q^^.U- i^ *>«f ci* jJ'xt/i&o &j#'Vf feffwol e^.X'f^ f6*># 

«| »s<Sifc^fflsJt sri* »<fey 6* ^i^iM ,«a«XX»«ff< ■• 

.g« ;2^^ ,4'ftf staoXJyf/i'i^wo^ \;«f ^^ f^ «iJteM l»«t« tt«ioX a «« ^ooe^aEs^AlX^ 

*o« 013, #ii<jf ,a'X8iixJT <',q«!aori 0,^ <3;A4ia'««!>jy'-wq^ «jrCii ^0 tt«»i;«riXl«aiX 

»{f oi ^^ii».vX»{>iSoo 0.1; ^X ^iti^'n isttoiVJTiw jfeijsqi^jSi? to *jni»c«a &^# 

>rsiX "X art? t» J-£f»Jt! ^ «u J>a,*^»'s.;ir »4f o«+ jfJi^o 84*«>n/i»vls,«i so"? «>»«© 

■^:r«a«jpoisfi)t)y Jo^ita ,.ffol^AaXX4fij^|Jl A «!|ja« ,«i0»XX#ini(g^ .©*• "(£«« 0# 
wit ^MiU aflXnX«i6 ttJil '*»:,»*x« ©'^' .&&»i.Xe«(|« i>«« tt*«»XX«Q<j:a 



402 - 21389 

tR. JUSTICE MCGOORTY DliiaEllTIKG . 

I dissent from that part of the foregoing opin- 
ion which holds that under the contract in question, in- 
terest on the #70,000 (Ingrahara's contribution to the ven- 
ture) sliould be included in dcterjjuining the losses tuereof. 

Under the decisions of the Jupreme Court in this 
case, it is re s judicata (1) that the contract imposed no 
personal liability upon Cooper to pay interest upon In- 
graham* s contribution to capital; (2) that the contract 
proTided that before there should b£ any dirision of 
profits , Ingraham should receive out of the proceeds of 
the sale of the property, interest upon his contribution, 
such interest for that purpose to be regarded as addition* 
capital; (3) that losaes should be borne i n proportion to 
contributions ; and (4) that for the purpose of apportioning^ 
losses the contributions wer e ^70,000 b y ingranam , and 
$50,000 b y Copper . 

The Supreme Court in Ingraham v. Lariner , 194 ill, 
269, held that "If « # ♦ the capital of the joint enterprise 
is to be deducted in ordor to reach a reiuainder whi ch shall 
constitut _e profits , then the six percent interest on the 
#70,000,00 is to b# deducted, as well as the principal sum 
of $70,000,* In distributing the property of a dissolTed 
partnership among partners, capital does not bear interest >^ * < 
in the absence of express agreement or a usage of the firm 
to allow it. 2 Bates Partnership, aec, 781. 

Shile the contract expressly provides that such 
interest shall be included for the purpose of determining 
profits, it contains no provision for the determination of 
losses, and to hold in the absence of such provision, as 



-«l<j« saiea©*x©»'i »il.t l4» *T;*j\g, tuiU' fmul iii*#aJfr J. 
. ttt a^fi^oo-xq. siiS" -lo-^^^o ■9*l:t,»»'x .Mi/G4a ^^^ 

aim lGqil:f>aX%q 944' &^ .tXaw @« .,&®49iu^9i» #4 ai «x pi:>«0C>'v^.Q?<^ 



does the majority opinion of this court, "that this aame 
Toasia of coriiputation \ya8 intended to apply to losses" ap- 
pears illogical. The supreme Court in the 194 111, 269, 
page 278, in denying appellee's contention that ^y the 
terms o: the contract Cooper agreed to pay ingraham the 
interest on the $70,000 from his own share of the profits, 
when the land was sold, apparently interpreted the contraot, 
not aa entitling ingrahaaa to interest absolutely, l)ut only 
conditionally, viz, in case the land sold for enough to 
pay the same after paying the expenses incurred by the 
parties in conducting the enterpri8«. It therefore fol- 
lows, in my opinion^ that defendants cannot he required to 
pay out of their own funds the whole or any part of the 
interest upon the ingraham contribution of 4:70,000. It 
seems erident that the sole purj^ose of inoerting in the 
contract the provision for the payment of interest to 
Ingraham on his contribution to capital, »nd payment by 
Cooper on the |>£iO,000 loan, was to secure to Ingraham a 
fair rate of interest upon the money he had actually in- 
▼ested in the enterprise before there should be any divi- 
sion of the proceeds of sale, as profits. 

As I interpret the decisions of the supreme court 
in thib case, it uas been hold that for the purpose of as- 
certainment and division of profits, ingi-ahaa's capital 
should be computed at ^70,000 plud interest lubTeon , and 
for the purpose of ascertaining and apportioning lotiees, 
at |S70,000 without interest , i am, therefore, of opinion 
that the decree of the circuit Court should be reversed 
and the cause remanded to that court with directions to 
state the account in accordance with the account stated oy 
appellants in tneir uhird assignment of error. 



*fi>^B &l£ii &&iW «jr'xuoa «Jtii# 1o n&lt%i(tQ ^k%^'i,4m 9d^ aeofi 
-jJA Ic 3aoqx;^t^ sfij <z«l ^Aiij* £»X«>4 i!s@94 ftjsii ^M ,»«£9 aifUoi 



405 .21592 



J. E. McCOY. J. R. JOHNilTf»J 
and J. G. HO ./ELL, 

Appellees, 



▼a. 



\ 



AClLft] AUTOMATIC PRj^TINO CO., 
( corp . ) , 

Appellant. 



\. 



,,.«^'^ 




APPEAL FROM 

MUNICIPAL COlfRT 
OP CHICAGO. 



' 200 I 



• ^' t 



WR. JU..TIC2! MCDONALD DKLIV.3H?3© THS OPINION 0? TIUJ CriirJ.T. 



This is a motion, by appelle'S, to dismisB 
the appeal. An inspection of the record filed herein 
discloses the fact that at the time this appeal was 
taken, there was then pending before the trial court 
a motion to vacate the judgment from which this appeal 
was prosecuted. Hence, the judgment was not final, and 
the appeal was prematurely taken. Hoskinfi v. Go, Pacif i_o 
^,, 243 111. 320. 

APPKAL I>l3MIS3i5D. 




.. mm jmT^ % 



1* O a iri e J. V.^ y ^ 



S£§£X55» 2?» 









.^nf^'ti- mw w mim^'^M mmMm^ €Mm&m -mxtiim* »m 






t' 



144 - 22092 



THE P;S0?1J! 01!' TJW 

STATiii OP liuLiriOIS, ^ 

Defondont. in '.rror, I 



▼ 8« 



Plaintiff in :srrar . 



laiROR TO 

I^^UNICIPAL 'Oir^T 
Oy CHICAGO. 

Of) I,A. 59 



IR. JU^TICi: MCDONALD DJ'XIViJinjSD THE OPIJSION Oy TR2 COUKT. ■ 

Pln:liItiff-tR-«rr«rVdef endant 'bei®*')^ was found 
giiilty of the offense of living in an open state of adultery 
and fomiccition ''ith f>ne Kary Williams, and was sentenced to 
pay a fine f?f :^300 mid ooata. To reyerse this judgment, this 
writ of 2r:rsr is ]pro««onted. \y 

Dcfend?int contends that the information upon which 
thia proD2c;:jitiftn is baaed is repugnant in that the defendant 
is ehrtrged therein with ha"?ing committed the offense of 
adultery and fornication with one "Mary Dee whose name to 
this affiant is unknown.* Obviously, the naae "!^ary ooe" 
was intended as purely fictional, and such heing the case, 
the use thereof is net inconsistent «ith the words following 
it, "^vhoae name to this affiant is unlmown.* 

It is further maintained "by defendant, that the 
informant imev the correot name of "Mary Doe" at the time he 
signed the inf ormition. From a careful examina^iion of the 
record, we can not say that the informant was possessed of this 
information. 

Defendant next contends that the verificaticn of 
the information is fatally defective. The point raised by 
defendant is, that the words, "sworn to" are iB5>roper in aa 



"'■-"'V 



,T3£yo3 sJtr m 









,HimX.lJU IK) STAte 




.«v 



'.cTttt^^-'^ 









-.i. A 



^0 T{.i,UiJS 



05 ^fflan «»80riw »*f! ^xsM" aiw jfCiTJhw iioi:3's»Jtisi*it©t tins x'teiSiuba 



•a* 



affirmation, "affirmed to* being the correct form. This, 
however, is a matter of form only, and should have baen 
raised specifically in the court below; it ctaaea too late 
when raised hero fnv the first time. 

N«r wae it nee saury for the prosecution to provo 
the statue of Wary vfllliams. The information charge' the 
defendant hxid "Mary Doe" with living together in an open 
state of adultery etfid fornication. There was competent 
evidence to show that the defendant was, at the time the 
alleged ofl'enae was conajriitted, a married man, that his v/ife 
wa^j then living and had not been divorced from hira, a 
witness testified tliat he was pressnt ipVien the aiarriage took 
place. vith this evidence in tl-ie recordj it vma unnecessary 
to prove the statup of J^ary Williams. Lj/ya ^ ari v. The People, 
198 111, 544. 

Defendant's wife was called an a witness by the 
prosecution, and, over objection by the defendant, was per- 
mitted to testify to the fact that th^; defendant was her 
husband, ^Jfter the case had been closed, on motion of the 
prosecution, the court r«-opened it to permit the intro- 
duction of testimony of the brother of defendant's wife, who 
testified that ho was present v^en the marriage took place. 
It is in the sound discretion of the court to let in further 
evidence ;if ter a case has been closed. Under the circum- 
stances, we can not say that the court abused its discretion 
by permitting this additional evidence to be introduced. 

v>;hile the evidence of defendant's wife was 
inoenpetent against him in this proceeding, yeL aa this oaso 
was tried without a jury, and there being sufficient 
competent evidence in the record to prove the marriage, the 
error complained of was harmless. 



•fi« 






W^ t9:^V>;rff» 51|p|3'«IR*XV3t{SJt. ©ISY .SJiSfiilXiW "^IMIIf %S »»ih«^« Silt 

«»?l<? tm al '%m^'&^^ ^^tfll d-ikis "#»« ^-st^v^" ■=■-'■ ,+ ,..4j..ii*i;Qt! 









*s« 



Finally, it is conbend^fl that the evidence ia 

inBufficiont to sua tain th<3 Judgwrnt, Wo havo rcafle a 

careful oxiuninatifm of the on tire record, and after dua con- 

oidor^ition of ttl3. bhe c-vid^noe •-lubisitt'^d iTxi6 tho infertsneea 

that r^saaonahly flow ther^froia, ••-yo are outl^ficd that the 

guilt of th(? defeniant hnn hoen furitabliahod "♦^eyond q roaaon- 

ahle doubt, Au was well stated in Crane v. The People, 168 

111. 395, p. 405s 

"Section 12 of the act relating to the crime 
charged provides that the 'offense of adultery 3he.ll 
"be sufficiently proved by circumstances wliich raise 
the presumption of cohabitation snd unlawful intiwa.cy.* 
The atatute recognizes the inherent difficulty of proving 
by direct evidence any :;1n :le act f>f adultery, 7h.e 
proof of circumstances which raise the presumption of 
cohabitation ruid unlawful intizaacy is therefore 
sufficient to prove adultery." 

Finding no reversible error, the Judgment will 

"be affirmed. 

AFFIRMED, 






'^''''■' ■'•■■■■■ .j&^MS'xiTt'l* Mf 



■^ — "'^^"""'^''^^^^^Vi:. 









332 - 21317 . 



VALIDA DlHaBY, 

Ai>pell9e, 



▼«. 



HENRY P. UliBiaCHT, 

Appellant. 

■ ' \ 



/ 



I / 7 yf 

• r / / ^y ^ 



9 A O T /. w 



APPBAL P iOM 

CIRCUIT coimT, 
COOK cothtty. 



\ 



3TAniM3ifT OP THE CASB.'/^This is an action in 
tort brought in "behalf of Valida Denshy, "by next friend, 
againnt John Umbrioht, Clara T-itter (sued by her maiden 
nai&e, Clara Umbricht), Henry '<■" , \Jrabricht and Chicr^o Bank 
& Office Fixtui'iJ Go,, a corporation, to reoovor daEmges 
for injuries suHtainod by being struck by an automobile, 
Rlleged to be o\'med, managed tind operated by Oiiid defendants, 
ouit was subsequently dismisaed as to the Chicago Tank & 
office "fixture Co. and John ITmbricht (the latter having 
died), and proceeded to trial aa to Henry r, 'Jrabricht and 
Clara Hitter. Henry ^. Umbricht, in addition to the plea 
of the general isBue, filed a special plea denying ownership 
and operation of the automobile in quesstion. There was a 
trial by jury resulting in a verdict for plaintiff in the 
sura of ^3250 against both defendjinta. A remittitur of )500 
"aavin^ been entered, defendants' motions for a now trial 
and in arrest of judgment were overruled and judgment 
entered on t}ie verdict for ^2750 against each defendant. 
Prom such judgment Henry ^, Umbricht appealed, 

Before entry of final Judgment, it w<>3 suggested 
of record that appellee, since the comrencement of suit, 
to&d arrived at legal age, and all pleadings were accordingly 



I ^^ *A*l OS 






flCIT ^ 



,YeaTfiJi ACTUM/ 






jsaX^ ail* o.■^ nold-ibJ&a ai .Moi^d'au .-^r "vj-iJct^K ,i9iih &%&l':) 
a B-mut 'dTsmST .noi^esjup k| a-JCi cfciaotf i/h siJi .'io noiJw'rtMSo hots 



-2- 



amended by Btr iking therefrom the wordc "liar shall 0. Densby, 
her father and next friend", wherever the said words appeetr 
thereiu. 

Appellees evidence tends to show that on July 18, 
1912, the defendants, Clara Rltter and Henry ", tJmbrioht, 
together with Smil Umbrioht, his brother, were riding in an 
automobile on Jackson Boulevard (in the city of Chxoago), 
in an easterl,/ diraotion; that when the automobile reached 
the west line of vood street, it "swerved or ^igaaged" in a 
northeasterly direction, passing over tlxe curbstone and the 
parkway between the curbstone and sidewalk at the northeast 
corner of the inttroootion of said streets, and upon the 
?ii<?ewalk there, where appellee was walkin^i, striking her wi^ith 
such force as to render her unconscious and to sustain injuries 
serious rxd permanent. The automobile continued in its onward 
courye, crashing into thu xoorch of an adjacent brick house, and 
stopping after the forward portion of said automobile had 
partially descenJcjd the basement steps thereof. There was a 
conflict "^T evidenoG sa to the speod at which the car was 
driven at the time ind place in question. 

It in admitted thut the front aeat of tlie car 
Tsras osoupiod by Clara .litter and her two uncles, Henry V. 
irrabrioht ani Smil Uwbricht. The evidence of appellee tended 
to show that these tlfvtec persons vare tlxe only occupants 
thereof; th^-t the dofendtuit, Clara attter, whb seated on the 
Inp of one of thn two cien in ^luefJtion, and that she and the 
men on whoce lap she *ws seated were jointly operating the 
cer. None of appc<llee's \fitneBse.:, nowever, identified 
appellant ffs the man who ^n-c^.c tiius jointly engaged, Defendants* 
witnesses Bahnsen and Hohner, eu?)loyees of appellant, 
testified that they oocupied the rear sjeat of said automobile; 
that it was operated solely by 3lara Ritter; that appellant 



-sat?; .TB abto^ ijijss »di 's»v®*K»rf!ir «"!jn3Jtt^ Sxsn -^r^ '^rtta'i larf 

ads fca« «j!»|«gftt4jfo ^ulS ^VQ. ■■^&i - ' "^ '"^ " , ■' " •' ^ ' ■ ■ '■ i ?•■ v:Xi© .-t aisea* *x»fi 

3ir« ,»»x»oii <oi»tf d-a&i»ai^ life Uft ii5>%«;^ sj# «*i'f •■ ^^-^ .■>>—.<- , .--^ ■.-. 

a»5>.r .far, ,.,r+ .ri«jiiise^-e^ie>®q58 Slid' ^4 :-- . .i.e.;: 

•sad ntU t9 #«©ft ^JBW^'i sif^ ii'SJ^ i>»^#it?'' • ni- 
► . 'iSiifcu ^erex^/illl <»Wif 1*4 .&«.':; '''^ > ^ ■- 

eiaaqsuraaa .n^jppjB. Vi^ -•■)■■-■■■■■ r--in,'-.'i.. , jlrtt «i«bj{i3 ©^ 

eji^ oo iamiJi^m orw ,^(S»dii. .......... ,....,.„.:. ,, . -■ j'>^->-«-'+ 

ditt fco* ♦4i« J&fiu l»«fl ,.?' ,ii .<.:i.-' ai a^ffl; ow* «»i-L ... 



•Si* 



was seated on the lap of his Tarother, Brail TMbricht, and 
that at no ti«o during the trip in quection, did the parties 
«n the front seat of the car change their respective positions. 
It was admitted by appellant, that he first operated an 
sutoiBotiile six to eight years prior to the trial, which was 
had January 4th, 1915, that so far as he knew, his brother, 
Emil, neY r owned nor operated an automobile, tmd that the 
latter wf^a a nonrooident of Chicago, ^y 

MR. JUifTICli McGOOUTY mH^VrsilUn TIE OPINIOjfJ OP TIIB COURT. 

The principal question of fact preaentfid by V\e 
e'vidence in this case ia, - Bid appellant operate, or 
participate in the oper.xtion, cf the autoinobil« in ::sufcoti on? 

There is no fiviiuiice of o\mership in appellant. 
While appellee's evidence tends to shstr that appellant took 
part in tho operation of the Cf;.r in questior., Buob evidenc* 
is uncfertain in chixif.ctfT and its not sufficient to fcr.t-r.bliGh 
a case as &gainu\, the pcf;itivc aonitl nrt only of ^pprllant and 
his co-dfclendunt, cluxa Hitter, 1'ut al?o by that of liahnaen 
and Rohner. 

>i/e are of the opinion, therefore, th?'t the verdict 
as to appellant is manifeiitiy again cs': u'le /fei^-Vit of tho 
evidence. The Judfe,inent of the Circuit Court as to /lenry 
P. Jabricht, appoilant, -^ill be reversed, and tli--? cnuso 
remanded, 

RfiViiRSSD Alio R3MAHD!.^"D. 



.«a6i*iac;i evicts a^aai "sisi^* ^^tmdo "sao sxlt Ifee *ij©6t im'x%,0ti$-jim. 



" ' ,imm W^': "^ MMiKV- iot': g^ w$iP5gs: "xtms^^ m%sms''^> * hsj 

'■■'•*■ 



352 - 21537 



il' 



Appellee, 

yiPPi^iAL »ftOM 'i'HB 

▼»» \ / ^ aUPimlOH COUHY OP 



Appai^laaf. 



COOK C'lJliyY. 



9 A O T A b 



ici. ju TICK MeaoaHTY D'XiVE^^-r.' 'mis opoxoN o:? tjis coury. 

^ W« li. Fitsher (appellee here), doing business 
as w. ., T?isher -k 'o,, T^rought suit In the Superior Cr>urt 
Of Cook County againat f!. H. Dunn. There vms a tri£.l by 
jury :-nd ct the close of sll the evidence the court directed 
the jury to find the isEuea for plaintiff and to nsrseaa hie 
damagt^s in the aum of ;;593,49, which was rcnnrdingly "^one, 
and judgment entered upon the verdict, yrom such judgment 
defendant appealed. 

The claim upon wrich plaintiff «ued defendant vne 
for grocerias and meats sold and delivered, 3)unn, the 
defendant, purchased grocerios and meats fron F. ^'» prowi 
rtc Co., and Buboequently frnni plaintiff, ^rho nuecpedwd v, v, 
Broim & Co, The ovidnnce shown thf.t ;l(-:f ond- nt, «t Vi^rious 
timss, made payroent to plaintiff upon Ptatnd ffcrounto. 
Checks evidoncinp :-uch payr^entB, drj*.wn l"^" dRfenrtfint and made 
payable to plaintiff, are in widpnce. The IrvRt, r.tnted 
account betw;.5!ftri the parties whk for r:95.49 rendrr'jA ug;uHt 
6, 1914. It in contendnd by defen'lant th.'t he ili<\ not know 
he wac dealing with plaintiff, but suppo£ied he wn.<-: degling 
with ''. •'^. Broim Sc Co. The only testimony in the. auin was 
thst of plaintiff sr.ci defendant. The evidence eho^re i.hat 
defendant mad? pnymentB to plaintiff on c.ccounts stnteri as 



\ 



■ ■■■'••■ ■■-^■sff? mm Mm^ 
^m^ti'imi^'- ' '■■■■ 



vsois • aes 






.'&,Bti&i^<i.(m 



1 h T A '^ C^ 
s.n©jt. -^j^ .<5j'' 'C^ ... ■ ,„ 

.»pfi;tKiS" sits ■ 'm mittm' mt '■^:iS''mtiM& iffHoaoaM • . -.isi 

iWfO'Xfl ♦'! ,^ noal: a^jcsia brts efi.fc«tooo«S fc«a^rf»^«f« ^Inshnst*^ 

'Ofcf ;J^<5n bil) ir/i .tafi^ Jita'j«0^o;> i;tf Dnf>i5i9*jWio ni *1 .<^X&X ,3 
Bfiw :);:}-::. y:i.f ax -v;nto«i4^efll tsXmo »ifr .6?) A cwo-^R . 



-2« 



folloviK, - ¥ay 4, 1914 - ;,I50, .Tune 6, 1914 - f^^o, July 
6, 1^14 - jSB.y'^ief endoUt' t contention uta to wrant of 
'«a5wl.;iu* t'^at i'ls; ■.vau dwaling *,it]* plain tij^f iv ^itiioat 
lE-orit/ Th'sce v*;<.» no confliat in the f'y.i<it»nc« nert.innnt to 
the ia.-.\iea ;iri';» the t!')urt did nor, err in dif^'ctlng n 
Tordict, 

Daf eii'ij-tnt aanigns a»> terror t.he failure of the 
ctiart iri 'lireoting n vordiot. for plaintiff to I'ive ewch 
ptsrtauptoi'y instruction in ■«ritinfT. "hen w pcTciaptory 
instruction i» given to find for one nf tlxe pf rties it is 
the bttttr practice to giva a written instruction, hut 
the fi^ilure to do so does not conetitute rtjveraible error. 



.■>i8. ,&ati4»«'s,^i> ffi ^t© ^TSR bib S'xtj0^: »«4*- ^'.i«M «;-• 






375 - 21562. 



ROSS ATTLSt LDMB.h.'R CO., 
a corpora Li on. 

Appellee, 



/appkal prom 



▼s. \ M CmCUIT COURT, 






COOK COUNTY. 



088.01© lA KAHDWOCD UmB'^^ / ) 

C#*^ * corporatlMi, \ / ) 

Appellant. /' ) 



2 A ATA F, ^ 

MR. JUSTICES MCOOnHTY DlO.IVi'lRBD TltB OPINIOK OF THE COURT. 

v^This »uit was brought in the Circuit Court of 
Cook County by appellee to recover from appellant the 
contract price of two cars of lumber, with its declaration, 
plaintiff fapTJlflle'e) filed its affidavit of claim showing 
$1419.93 due. The defendmt fftpTexi^rt") filed with ita 
plea of the general istme thereto, an affidavit of merits 
alleging that said lumber vae not up to grade, nor accordjn g 
to contract; that defendmt has not accepted same and that 
plaintiff is indebted to defendrmt for freight and d^'iaurrage 
charges paid by def endfint on said lumber In the cum of 
1238.92. Thers was a trial by Jury resulting in a verdict 
in favor of plaintiff in th« sum of tl.'599.52. Prom such 
verdict the plaintiff consented to a remittitur of $38,95, 
and, thereupon, motion for a new trial was overruled and 
judgraent altered against dsfendfmt in the sum of fU.^er.fj?. 
From such judgment defendant appeals and assigns as error 
the giving of certain instructions. 

The defend.jnt in Chicago, ordered from plaintiff 
two carloads of quarter oak lumb^•rr, "flooded stock, but very 
well washed and cleaned." •-^ald lumber was shortly thereafter 
shipped by plaintiff from Jieth, Ark,, to defendant's order, 



Kr 



U 



'^Mll»si<i 




.Sf»^15 - 3ff, 









, >o 



.*re.Oi«i# t» ntie i!>r£t nJt ilni&.i>£e>;%atl) ieteiisi'^ h»r^^a» imstg^u^ 

"XtlSaltilq molt lj«i»M'« ,02s^^olti\) «i #aKt>i»twib «Mfr 
taJ^iafiOii^ X'^t'':*^:!^^ ^^^ 'xoctat&X l^i«u **tftntBSiXa brus bsxfftav XX9« 



-2- 



Chicago. There is a conflict of evidence as to the condition 
Of the lumber in question upon ito arrival in hica^o. It 
«ao sold subject to the rules of inspection of the National 
Hardwood Association, but such rules do not appear in 
evidence. Upon its inspection by dcfeniiant, the latter 
refused to accept the luaber, and, subsequently, declined 19 
permit a mutual inspecion thereof, on the ground that a 
portion of said lumber was covered with aud, that it ^rb not 
possible, therefore, to detennine how badly it had been 
damaged by water, asked plaintiff to pay the freight and 
deisurrage charges thereon and take it away. ^)ef endfint's 
secretary, a, H. iichoen, testified that he telephoned plain- 
tiff before defendant removed the lumber from the cars, that 
it was not up to grade and not what defendimt ordered; that 
plaintiff's representative upon the following day requested 
defendant to unload the limber from the oars so as to save 
demurrage, which defendant did. No part of the lumber in 
question has been used by defendant and remains in its 
possession, subject to plaintiff 'a order. 

There was evidence introduced by defendant tend- 
ing to show that the value of said lumber when r.ceived, 
was $330 to $M0 less than the contract price, v 

Defendant's order and plaintiff's acceptance 
thereof constitute the contract between the parties. There 
was no express warranty as to the quality of the lumber 
contracted for, but there was an implied werranty that 
defendant would get what he bargained for, viz., quarter oak 
lumber, flooded stock, but very well washed and oleimed. 
Bab cock v. Trice, 18 111, 420; C hicago Packing and Provision 
Co. V. Tilton, 87 111. 547, 

The contention of plaintiff's counsel that the 



«s- 



#oft w.^w 51 d-jj.^ ,&sisa r^^-iw .bRi^^vea ««spf ij&i^iijl i'i-;i 1= i 

»vsa a:? a^' 08 ^i'^eJa ©ill- iSsi'tl: leeidSiui 'i&itt Imeim a^' ,_^isa. 

mil fti iiiiiimx9't him ifmbm'^.^b t0 fe^fiw m^t^ ■ 

V.«9l'3c«f d'fc^'5#i*&» »«Ja- ,iifif<«# »ft»i <5fc€'4 «># ■" 



-So 



acta of the defendant constituted an acceptance by It of 
the lumber in question, is not supported by the evidence. 

Defendant after inspecting the Iximber in cjueation 
and rejecting aane, r.'.fuaed the request of plaintiff to 
have an inspection of such lumber made by the iiationai 
Hardwood Asa'n. It ia contended by plaintiff ' s counsel 
that sucsh refusal of inspect ion, together with defendant's 
continued poa&eaaion of the lumber, which posseasion was 
at plnintiff's request, was such exercise of ownership by 
defendant, as constituted an acceptance, "iio long as the 
buyer can, without self contradiction, daclare that the 
goods are not to be taken in fulfillaent of the contract, 
h« has not accepted them," Blackbijurn on vales, page 17. 
The evidence does not shov such accept^uioe by defendant as 
would constitute a discliarge of plaintiff's liability under 
the contract. Underwood et al. v. volf . 131 111, 425 - 442, 
The acta of ;ief end-j-it, in <iny event, did not constitute such 
an acceptance as would waive the implied warranty aa to 
quality. Babcock v. Trice , supra . 

The first of plaintiff's instructions complained 
of told the jury, in effect, that if they believed frosa the 
evidence defendant accepted the luiaber in question it would 
be liable under its contract, erroneously excluded the element 
of implied warranty arising from such cent i act, UoTvia v. 
>;ibaux, lf;9 111. 627, 642. 

The next instruction assigned as error proceeded 
upon the theory that if the lumber in queatioa wau not 
according to contract and the defendant accepted Sfue, the 
implied warranty as to quality was thereby waived. " -"ven 
when the contract is executory, the claim for damages on 
account of a broach of the warranty will survive the accept- 



-s- 



^.^jflUAi^aa an>'i^djniri^m ^'ftiii^lilJftl^^ t9 i9%X\ 9£^ 
nsiS jcd^lt b«»veiX»ci ic&^$ %l Mil* 4#»»11» ai ^X^^ul odt hl&t lo 
bX^c'v tX i3(i^te9Sj> fli; -3»d''m^X »4# bB&^&Zf£i& imibeeitfiii 99rrsblr9 

•* QX ;^?«>v^ .^oja .tflint& iaOAj^a Brno's ^jti^JT'CjS H;it«si««w ^IXqml 1fc» 

.£AS ,nd ,1X1 WX ,X£U9<fl? 

no edgAMaflb lAl^ifXiiXo 9A& ,^*iod^uuax» 9fi* n«?fw 



ane« of the pr^^perty,** Ujartorvfood et al. t. feOlf . supra . 
^u<di instruction is clearly erroneous. 

The third instruction coraplainod of, erroneously 
stated v^at would constitute a construotiye acceptance by 
defendant, and invaded the province of the jury by uB^surnuig 
such ucceptance. 

For manifest and prejudicial orror in giving the 
foregoing inatructiwis, the judgment of the Cii'cuit Ouurt 
is reversed end Uio cause renandt^d. 



183 - 22X35 



<^ 



X 

^ 



THS PEOPLE OF THJS STATE 

OF ILLINOIS, f 

Defoadiyat in .rror, * )i5iRR0R TO 



TB, 



\ / 



) 

) MUSICIPAL COURT 
OP CHICAGO, 



LKWIS S« RICii, 

PlaioUff in ZJ^ror. 



^ A A T 
,^ \i V ^ 



O 



MR, JUi.TICE MOGOORTY DI^IV£11I5D THE QPINIOK OP THB COURT. 



This is a criminal proceeding by informatics 
charging Lewis Rice, the def<indant, ^^|hbr±frC1lT'in" ?:rrbi^ 
•n Sepieruber 22, 1915, v/ith being an inmate of a house of 
ill fame, at 609 3. Wabash ^.ve., in the City of Chicag®, 
Trial by jury haring betsn waived, the cause was submitted 
to the court resulting in adjudging defendant guilty and 
sentencing him t© pay a fine of »)200, and the costs of 
suit, taxed at ;ji^. 

The defendant on above date and for six years 
prior thereto was employed au clerk in the (jiueen Hotel, 
being the premises referred to and deacribed in attid infor- 
jnation. It is contended by defendant, if he is guilty of 
any offense xmder the evidence in this case, that he is 
guilty of being a keoper and not an inmate of a houae of 
ill fai&e or assignation, etc« 

The principal questirin presented for our ccosid- 

eration therefore is, • ^as defendant an "inmate" within 

the meaning of soctitm f)7-a-l. Chapter 38, of the Criminal 

Cede? oaid section is as follows: 

••57-a-l. .Vh»ever is an inmate of a house of ill«ffjne 
or aBsign>^,tion or pl^ce for the pr ctioe of fornication 
or prostitutian or lewlness, or who shall oolicit to 
prostitution in r\ny street, alley, park or other place 



i \ s^Ajra am w hi 

V/ -^ y A A C* 

/j-xasx xxa lo't ijou od-jab »ve<fa a© ;J«e.i>fi®l®i> si£T 

1o ■^tfl/.ws «x Oil Ji »^«£j£!WlQfc ^icf bai>jSS!i^«dP «l #X .noijaw 
eJt ftjfi Ji^Af ,dat30 »M* «i ©oasljivft »ii^ *ii?hnu sena'llo v,a« 

\i>i& ^i^f.>l^:^a:^u^yi "xo sasI ill 

X«aiet*xO sff* t«» ,^ *iw.i<j;3i£0 »i-«-Te ewiio^a 16 ^gnimiBSt ^di 

. .^ioirrte"^ "a** fr'»'-'"^ - ' ••'' ;< " ■■■-■■■. iq to ijrii.^r.oj^i-sSK to 
rj „-.;oiXc.2 1.1 .si to n9XJvtitnoiq i« 



•3* 



in any city* Tillage or Incorporated totm in this 
. tate, shall btt fined not exceeding two hundred 
doliare, or imprison e^id in the county jail or houee 
of correction for a period of not nsore than one (1) 
year, or hoth.* 

Section 57 ao far as satr^rial ia &b follows: 

"JJ7. .^hoevtjr Jceepe or maintains a houae of ill faae 
or place for the practice of prostitution or lewdnesa, 
or whosT«r patronizes the acytie, or leto any h >uHe, room 
or other premises for any cuch purpooe, or shall keep & 
coasunon, ill governed and disorderly h(si*ie, to the 
encouragement of idleness, gajning, drinking, fornication 
or other misbehavior, shall b«^ finc*d not exceeding^ • 
|200, * * * « 

The evidence tendn to show that the hotel in 

question wai^ a house of asaignotion under the i^tatute; 

that men <:'Jid vcm&n came to said hotel for the purposes of 

assign at ion,|and the circura&tances were iiuch that the 

defendant had knowlt^^dge of that fact, and that these 

eircumsteuaoes in our opinion made defendant an "inmate* 

within the metming of the statute, and the Judgstent of 

the Jiiunicipal Court is therefore affirmedri 

■'■■' — j 



««£•• 



/_ « » ^ » ,or>r4 



/ 



302 • 22257 . 



THE P^OPLB OF THE STAT3 / ) , ^i 1 ^ 

OF iLLIi^OIi,, ) i ' ■ 

Defendant in jSrroTf ) 

{ f ) WRIT OF }SRROR 

▼«. ! ) TO MUNICIPAL COURT 



OF CHICAGO. 



\ / 

HAHS HB3S, \ 

Plaintiff in >jrror, C% }\ f\ T 



MR. JU TlCi) McOOORTY I5i5LIViiR'<D Tim OPI^'ION OP THii COURT. 

V / 

V This ia a criminal proceeding by inf orrsrition 
against dofendc-int (plaintiff in error) charging him with 
obtaining from JSugene Sullivan, the infonaant, with intent 
to cheat and defraud, by means of false pretenses, the sum 
of ^190. Trial by Jury having been waived, the court found 
the def endcint guilty in manner and form as charged in said 
information, and sentenced him to the House of Correcticn 
of the city of Chicago for three months, and further to pay 
to the Cleric of the Municipal Court of Chicago, a fine of 
f200 and costs of suit. 

Ness, the defendant, entered into a contract with 
the said Sullivan whereby he agreed to do certain carpenter 
work on Sullivan's dwelling house, for a certain stipulated 
sua. Defendant at aulJLivan's request performed other work 
on said house in addition to th^it specified in their 
contract, for which wcrk defendant, as a result of compromise, 
accepted $190 in full settlement 9f all claims against 
Sullivan, On the day following, defendant executed and 
delivered to Sullivan a statutory waiver of lisn ss to said 
piemisea. .".ullivan i^nrl his wife testified that said $190 
was paid by oullivan to iefendant upon representation by the 
latter that all bills for l<ibor and mat rial furnished had 
been paid. iefendjmt testified that at the time of said 



Ai.^ *< l-tTi -^tX*.'^ 



,00At)IH9 '10 



f^ ;':"i;^#^%' i-.'^f^M 






l>fl« for9#wesx«» ;J«»sJbjs©tsi!! t^rdwoxlat xbId &d^ «0 .asaviiXwa 



-2- 



settlement, he stated to Sullivan that t}"»r3 vfr;,re unjvtiid 
bills in the 8\iai of -^40''' for material u'so'l "b:' Icf onl?mt on 
said property. Defendant further tentifi^ni that auliooquent 
thereto, he offered to pay the Hines U!m>^er roKTp..ay for lumber 
used by defendant on said property in monthly inBtalliaents, 
which offer said company declined to oncopt . Tnovs ia no 
evidence of any lion filed on inforinart'g pr^^raisec "by .^ny 
subcontractor, nor that informant has T'-c,r^.-vi?-A any nc!iice 
or claim for such lien, although the iMfrrr. ticn hcrfcAu was 
filed aore than four months following' thp cf>i.««l«tion of said 
work "by defend/iat,^ Ve do not think dtsT'-'inflfwit' .1 intent to 
cheat and defraud the informart has bteen e--* Cc?.bii3heii, in 
otat e V. Hurst, 11 V'. Va< Ropcrts, 54^ V"-, ths court tii<3re 
held th.'it a laan cannot be held guilty of prc*'?'jrin,5: jp.ari-s/ by 
felee pretenses, with intent to defraud, ^^ho has nuirely 
coll'-cted e debt justly due hi*", thw»;(?:V, i/. m^Jax:;^ kuoIi 
collection he has ui?ed fals^ pretensee . Iv the In-'t^rit case, 
the informant by his settleraent rith rtoftjndfjfn t inpliedly 
admitted he was juatly indebted to the latter. The parties 
uctcd i?itVvtn tiiiir l^^ul lights in making ouch ecttlejnent, 
subjerit to thf; ri^Mts of subcon tri.Gtors. Therg in evidence 
tendinf; to ^hTx th' t Stfendaut, iiuoaequent to tiie settlement 
in question, made payment to certain euhoontractora, and 
tendered payment by Inctalliconts to another. In this r.tate 
of the Bcord re eve. rot convinced thst th* e-seential elsnent 
of intent has taon -istablishea. The ,1jc:^j«f'nt nt tV.f; i*ur:^.oipal 
Coxa-t of Cb ct^^o is tlici-efore reversed fod th'-^ cnuce rGissnded, 

H^\r>S!iS.i;TJ AMI* RBMAH;).:-').!. 



•£- 



hi»^&ii &t.ti^ »rmU ff.st^ f^TiXiUrS &t hai- ,:fmi^-^U&9S 

,«4'fJa^X-ti-'iRr;-, xIiSr^noiE al ^f.Jt*i?f%.^ fe4a-«^'«S. ^ftefcas'- ^-jeu 

o« ai s'jfcK .^fi,gj>!>« <a> j^.gjsiXssi) ^ftataato^ l>i.»s ^©llo ilaul* 

•J ;^ ;-fOW 



«,r. 



V 



\ 



r. 



i ^ ^ / / / . 

AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, - «-.-^"'^ 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday,; the sixth day of April, 

in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 

I 
within and for the Second Districtlof the State of Illinois; 

Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presiding Justice. 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES. Justice. 

Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Jujstice. 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Cl;erir. ^0 leA© ^ X 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. | 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on tne IStn day 
of September, A. D. 1915, the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit : 



,InqA lo \;jsb rl + xia --.- .. ^-ifcsfcjjT no /flWjsJifO J^ tl 
,n99;tli^ bnjs beTbnurl snxn |)njS3i:/or!^ -^ r- ,t -rr: 
:8£onrIII - sJS 9dj ' ~ 'criJe.u t.-.o o 

or-aK-L :aaf ,Jjaaia aOMAH)iUL 

• ; SKAUQ 
,8UAh.Hiri .M vlHOl 

aaH*I0T8IhH^ 



5o:Jfw- a2H3S 

-« able ' 



Gen. No. 5931. 

Old Colony Life Insurance 

Company, appellant, 

VB 

Helen L, Graves, appellee. 



Appeal, from Kane, 



Niehaue, J, 



jg<i^ /^ 



riaft*- 



y. Old Colony Life Insurance Company, Tirainat t h B a < -»»» e l l « e Helen 
L. Graves ij^ii -tho Circuit Oourti of ferte Coun -tyu, to vacate and 
set aside a judgnient recov-^red by tTim 'ur^y r 1 1 <m^ against the 



for the 3um of ^1GQ5,P.5 and co'^.ts o-f suits 

, 9u.it /jpwmenced by 



Cosraibpolj tan Life Ineiirance Soapanyc Association on Jm-e 1-/ 

and to rs- 

strain t^ie ci , j I'L.ilTiuity . from proaecutinp: 

her ^-jaas^a L:: abo wt- M"y ' ^^, iLiii i i ift^ against the -j^ nrn anii MMiiUpgii— atfee 

cj rquit g o u r' t . T it T'"1ftrTT « 'Oa unty^ to enforce payment of the 

[ judgment recovered aainet eald Cosmopolitan Jiif s^Jnsurance / . 

flesociatipnA"/:'^^^^^ ^ fi^^-fi-^-^-^-^^ />- X^-''-'-"'' 

The bill of i-;omplaint as arrignded, aileg^, that the Old 

Colony Life Insurance Company ^h3 a corporation exaating fc^ 

1 
virtue of the law of this state, 38 an o d li e reserve insur- 

nce company; and that th e C smopolitan Life I/isurance A^iso- 

clation, on and prior to September 9, 1909, '«as a corporation 

exiating under the laws oX this sonte, and doing inerurance 

business on the assessment plan; and that this Cosmopolitan 

association Ijad pri^^r to July let, 1901 , been knov/n by the 

'.aine of the Knights of the Globe Mutual Tenefit Association,' 



' / 



% 



at on September 9, 1909, the a^^»prg-irJrt»at ,_jQ±A' \Qm^% wy hi f o 



Ijagt:frtgsi7ir (Toutj/j.'ny , entered knto an apreement with the Cosmo- 
politan Life Insurance Association by .vhich the Old Colony 
Comiiany promised, in consideration of receiving all tlie asstts 
of the Cosmopolitan Association, to assume all of the liabil- --..^ 
j( ities of the Cosmopolitan Association then eristing, 'ind which / 



,«ns3 



.isee .0'^ .nbO 

so.ijeiuafil aliJ xaoLoO b£0 

av 









aeveiO ,J 



rX 



©rf^ *8niB-f>£ ^js^j. 



sof^ ifd betsvoost dnetrghj;;^ jb ebies *ee 









*n&ingf.'.uj; 



-088A et!nr.iij3iT'^ sItJ. rtctilono'rtf^ 



'^.-loij ■. i-oop»A 



*44«i-^»»^e4:' 



■" 1 

wjbX c . bu-^itr I 

no ^aol^Ato i 

I 
eeimoiq Y^^n«oO i 



might exist, on and after the date of the agreement^ 

It jca- alleged iix^ino l ; ill that the a pi ii ll g c , recovered 
the Judgment mentioned ajrainst the Cosmopolitu.n Life Insurance 
Aeeociation, for an amount claimed to be due her upon the cer» 
tificate of n ember ship issued to ci- ' ),|palle e ' 'S- huaband, Frank E, 
Graveaa, by the Knights of the Globe Mutioal Benefit Association, 
the predecessor of said Cosmopolitan Assooiatjonj tliat the 
cirduit court of Kane County was v/it|tout jurisdiction to 
render said judgment arr^^inst the Cosmopolitan Association, be- 
cause that Association was never legally served with oummonax) 
the su'mone upon which said judgment is baaed, having bean served 
upon one J, 0, Myers, as agent of said Cosmopolitan Association; 
a n a K tiiat Myers was not an agent of said Association: and that 
the Cosmopolitan Association did not learn of the pendency of 
the suit, or the rendition of said judgment, until about Sep- 
tember &, 1909, . -ir^ 

The bill also allegOj^ that the a,pi>oll oe.had, -rior to 
the eommencement of her suit against the Cosmopoli t.an Association 
and prior to the recovexy of her judgment, in conaideration 
of the sum of S500, paid to her, ler-;a:;.ly released the Cosmo- 
IBBiixx politan Association, fromsll claims and < emanda v/hich 
she may have had by reason of eaid certificate of membership. 

The bill also alleg^ that Frank E. Graces, the ins. red ^ 
on tiie 35th, day of August 1907, forfeited hia rights in the 
insurance certificate, for non paynent of membership fssa 
payable on that date; that, in or. er to becone r instated in 
the Cosmopolitan Insurance Aasociation, he had signed a rsin- 
statement health certificate, in -vhlch he mr^de a warranty that 
he was at that time in rood health, -rnd -^i^ not have anjr disease 
or serious illnesaj and had not taken ne i r h---' -.ny 
medical attention, nor had b-;en treated by a phy- . ., ^ ace / 



I 



J ^rf^^mccc iir . 



^teix9 :f'rf:2^ 






'.iJ ft.?-'* iJ[o'"0?f PoD p-'^t *'^r'^«-"<' frftfa^''-' 






.nori'jBjtooF?/-. 
D^^ aoli9ii'ni • vl'tsfoT ertB]! lo *tr?f»o t?:x;h1x^ 



bevxee xisa 



.•^ .c o o * '? A ^ .r '?"'? 






SOiJJSiuOCiiiP 

n.-.::t-.t's{*i 






tj ^J.rftnf 



. Ja8»i\t n 



-O 

..»j-«ot J cJaes •on.-- 
sA «Of.£ii'StiI a^iJtloqoflraoO ©/if 

oo'3 at e^^J: J^« 8>5W •(( 



becomintj a member o:^ t?5e Assoclstior] ^^"t t.^eaa warranted 
repr'jsentatloncox said ^rar'x °', fJra-se ware -mtrue; r^al it -was 
agreed in aaid reinataten'.ent certificate, t' at in Cjse t.ey 
T/ere untrue, the carti-s'icr^te of ': ember nliip flhoul(; be held mill 
Bnd void; -no tl.at tiie «.ama aus t'-.ereforg void; s.t\C that, be- 
cri^uae of the matters alleged in the bill, ths ju^-gment recovered 
by (.ippoilog *•• unji.iat, inequitable anr- void. 

Tlie a-v.-^ollse answere;- and filed a cross bill, raying 
for affirmative relief, and aakin;-y for a decree to compel the 
26^««±±ai^ to pay tlie amount vfhjch fihe claimed was oue her on 
the .'.embership certificate, and on the judgment J^«hich sne 
had recovered, T^ ia oirci-:it„ JIcmx.t,-ii.aaxiL-- tl >. e . av4-^^& ne- e' off ar ed - — 
b y tho par lien ' ur ' gn . L h e -~it-<»^ueA_^^.g s ertted^^by^^ _^^^ o s s 

bi4ei-r ^"^ rendered a decree <' ielmiB^iing the original bill for 
want of equity, granting -^he prayer o C the cross bill^isnd 
adjudging tr.at sr;T>e4Xaa recover .^i'ainst the a r; pa. 11 ant the sum 
of |1950.35, and coats; £i:ui that, upon payr-iant of sjid amount 
the judgment af;ainst the Coamonolitan Life TraJirance Association 
be adjudged satisfied, 

Tho iooord. di e elo aee rnaRy--c on tr o vera l^a->^.-.^nd-ja._ jonnib er^ __ 
ofL_aaut iH>e4i'ed-'txtxH^1rttnfir Trf""fifcrtrn£^ -o-fV 4hi« -a-fi^^ei-,— - 



It appears f ^qm - ^**m-^^^r*onQ 9 ^ that Frank E, Graves, thehusband 
of a. t t' T^o i ho e , filed an a-iplication for membership in the Knights 
of the Globe Mutual Benefit Association, about Hay 33, 1895, 
at Elgin Illinois j and t: at a xz±X at certificate of membership 
.for the aurc of *3000 ine^jranoe, Tor the benefit of his -ife 
Helen L, Graves was issued to him on that (5ate, The oertifioata 
contain^tlie following provisions: 

That the Knights of the Globe Mutual Benefit Association 
agrees to pay to the beneficiary, the sum of the insurance, 

"in consideration of * * * * the sum of !!^5.00 * * * * and 

^^ — . 
of the payment of such other swa of money for assef^sment Tor / 



^ j!i i . j;-f zji-a 







itO TOii »Jj.fo «JBW i)»WiJB. ■ "'- ■ V. »..^^_>^.^ 

r , - 






^g.-.j<. i i^f ^ , ,, - ■•>j;0 sriJ to ; 

©!:£ mi to tJcl'- to nw/e eVJ lot 

•;..i ,.,'.. r. .'>■«. o ?fiT «»dir ..=,vBt'i>'^ ^J aelsH - 



,1 ■ "' ; 



!-| OO 



u> iii* 



mortuary claims and expensee in naid Ageociation according to 
txie By-Laws marie and provided"; * * * * "that it is . li~:o 
understood^ covsnanted an'^? a[;reed; (l) T.:at the aforeaaid in- 
sured shall be liable to asee-ar ents -f'or mortuary claims ac- 
cording to tl.e .able of rates /prescribed in trie ByjILaws of sad;; 
A39ociationj an' for Lris dues for ex^-anses aa required by said 
By-Laws^ upon due notice iven in the manner nreacribed by said 
By-Laws." 
Aj-so ' u) following- provisions: 

"It is under8tc;od and agreed ■/nat the application of the 
insured to "'horn this certificate is i-a,:ed, nov. on iii.e 
in t.e OTfice of this ass ciation :-..nd bearinr. even nnmDer 
herewith, to ether with this certificate and the By-Laws of 
this association, = lail ooViStitute Ine complete and only 
contruct retveen ths afo/esaid insured and t:;sm^elves, " 
The following is the provision cont<^ined i iikB t le certificate 
conoerninc the asse^S'snts to be paid, m the manner of paying 
them: 
I "And it is algo underetood, covenanted and agreed: (4.) 
' that the aforesaid insued shall be liable ?ror aesessments or 
mortuary claims accordinr to t e table of r-tes prescribed in 
the By-Laws of said ai?sociat:. on, and for the 'ues for expenses 
as required in said By-Laws, upon d je notice given to him in 
'the manner oreacribed in said By-Laws," 

On the back of the certifi3ate, under the h :ad of "Important in- 
structions anrl information*, appears the following, coiiCerning 
notices, dues am. assessments: 

"Notice of dues ■-\n<' assessments due -A'ill be proi.. 
in time to reach all members on or before the tenth day of the 
month." 
Alao the follo^.-ing concerning a.dvance payment by members: / 



OS :gatD%oooB aoltJilooBBk btMP at aesfieigxs ba& ■mlalo \x»u}Toai \ 

oeXi. .tjiriif" * j^&^ftivoT.q hna sham awjaJ-^a extif '■ 

bilJB^JiQ fWjBJtY^ Sit* -ni badJk^oeeiri amtai Jo ©Id*. 9 .; 01 gnibrcoo 



bl&si XjS l^ecfl'xoae: 



. -frXJ:. 

" , 8 £ '' . 

aiityaq- 'to i&m 



(1) jliseia 



ix a«vig •O'Jti^OyB' ti/ , aw.3J-Y6r- 

! an o i a t V o .' q i^ffJtwoiX ■: ' \ 

J-fltoo noiajfcv07' ivtoLid\ eriT 



»i i beix'ioaeiq t»;tjp': 

iix mxri oi nsvxg •olJ-o. 

t 

-ttt .ifn.e*aoqmI" 
ijn in 16 Oil 00 ^sctl' 



- 10 00£ B mlal o Yaix; J li6itf ' 

bsilupBT BJS ' 

jB^jBaliJ-'iso arfJ- lo jCobcJ 6ifi nO 
aaoiJ-OijT^B 
.e80i:fctf 

: Lisi oi BmtS at 
« .rfdrcOffl 



BtVii.!- 



a^iXdfflBPBt? 



i '<d *n»tfr\:aq Bon^vhjs anJtxiisonoo jjnlwoXIol arfcf oelA j 



"Members wishing to avoid the inconvenience of making small 
payments, or the danj^ar of Lapsing arising tiierefrom, may 
make advance deposite in any amount desired. Any unused portion 
of such advance payment or deposits, shall be payable with this 
certificate at its maturity, in a'"dition tliec&to. Traveling 
members or others, vfho do not raceive their mail regularly, 
will find the advance plan nuoh safer andraore convenient," 
In reference to the amounts s.nd number of assessments, -.hich the 
members of the association vers to pay. Section 3, Article o 
of the By-Laws of the Association, in if'orce at the tin;e of 
the issuance of the Graves Certificate, nrovide/^ that on a 
certificate of ■'^3(^00, each memoer anfClM^pay a s'fiall annual 
assessment into the ^-eneral fund, to pay t' s expenses o: the 
association, of ;^lj and Section 7 rovidei, that mortuary as- 
sessments shjpJMrtlbe iriade u->on all s^embers to pay on the amount 
of funds, as often as required to pay lodges acccrding to the 
txlui table, Tlie table referred to fixeJ i.e amount to be 
^aid U'^on the Graves certificate at ^:1,JQ, 

The provision in the by-laws, about the nctice of assess- 
ment to be sent to members, ^iaj: as follC'S: 

"A notice of an assessment delivered to a member, or left at the 
insuredAs residence or place of business, or mailed poftt:'>aid to his 
poet office ah^ress as last f,.rnished to the Secretary of this 
association by such : ember, shall be co;;sidered duly served, " 

In the ydar 1901, the n-me of the Knights of tne Glooe I.'utui 
Benefit Association, was olianged to Cosmopolitan Insurance Asso- 
ciation, The latter association adopted a new set of by-iaws in 
1905, by vThich the directors made mo thly asseosMents "vhsn 
necessarysB, to be paid by members for the mortuary fund; it also 
raised the table of rates, and increased the assessment levied 
against certificates lilce the one held by Graves, from r^'1,00 to / 



1 

' 4Yi'=c«XE»3si IX-an timii ©viaos'x ,|o« -ol* and . ^ eiscfaaai 

" »*a3insviioo eiomfent^ x«l«a rfoyia «|UM^ ftoasv 
©if* doidyf ji*fl8w8«e8i?ji to ttecfwan Bis* etnirotas ©rff "d^f 'eotcfaiel^;! nl 

;?■a•ifO:"^^: »ri3 no vx^q o;f aisdats afeasf »(.. .3;fnamB?se 

— Beeaa* to ©oiJ- ,aw«X!«t<3 uefvo 

: » vro .. >*■.«• lacfiHsm o# fp^e ' ad o^ ; t|t»a 

arf^r *t >tletj. xo ^idofftsui ^TJfcX».fo ^aemasati8£ a* lo aol 

exa osT fcXBC4;fioq ^)©X r. aBariJfcaw^f ie ao#Ig xo.»6^s£i«yi aAJbeiueni | 

Bills- lo Tf'i^J-si ; oeilaiwa.'l: *aoi ea ««9'^b^J8 aoitlo #8oq j 

" .i)ev'iee x-tJJi) beiabJtaaoc , ladmajir. rfoya X"^ 'K0-^^*J'^^<^8B£ i 

1 

iix/ittfii; eooXO antf 'io eJ-rfgJtnX ? j-OeX'tJSsy e/J»^ nl i 

-, . i 

-oaaA »oaax;;,'-aflI R^f JtXoqomacO o& bo^jn^ ^nojtjfjsxooseA J-ilansS \ 

Hi avAl-Ycf "^0 ^aa wan a ba^qo^js aoitskioosnuf iBit^l axfT .noitxsio ' 

edii'.- • E&aaajB X-trii*"'''**'*' ^J^'R^ Bao#; iioiriw ycf <80GI 

^■:'tj3xrJ:'ir ■ oo' ^ayiJSBaeoan ; 

tgraaseee -j bsaJtBi I 

v£i-x-0 yc ii aaJ> Jsoilitfaso JaflXflgxj 



$1,70. The by-lav/ with r-jference to notice to be civen to 

membere, of aesees ents, remained the same. 

About eight years prior to his death, the insured, Frank 
E, Graves, in followinr his trade as a printer, moved aWay from 
Elgin, and took up a reRidsnce irt diff ^;rent parts of ihe country; 
and thus took up p. residence in St Louis, in t\e early part of 
the year 1C07; andlatar jn the month of Aoril, settled in Nash- 
ville, Tennessee, It---rs--trHrfteTttT~"fTCTr~'TlTa^^ 

^trr-rsrtl'T^-thart /jie insared ^ept ti.e asgociation, of which ne v/as a 
Triember, con"3t.i.ntiy inferred o*" the cliangee of his reaidencej. 
and upon his removal to ^Hahville, from St, Louis, in 19'7, he 
sent a notice givin;;; his sr.oress at Nashville, to 1.::? fiecretary 
of t>ie Coamo^')olitBn Aaaociatj f)n, Tt had ' eco ^e a m iter oi 
Custom, between hiw nd ■'■.e aasooiation, to send money for his 
aesesenents m sums of !?^5,00| nr'*. so ■eti'^ies as oent ^'3,00 nd 
flO.OO; and soietirree thase amount? v;ere sent in advance of mor- 
tuary assess ents made by r,he s-ssociation, W\\en the amount so 
remitted was used up, th- ^'ec etary of the association vculd 
notify him to 1 .at affect, and he then would scain reont money. 
This cuetom prevailed during practically tue whole period of 
his membership. The amounts remitted by him were a 'plieU in 
payment of the assessmsnts v;hich had uecof^ie due, ■±nd which 
thereafter became due. In this way, he sent t e -^um of ti&. 

^5,00 about the 25th. of April, 1907, s.fter his removal from 
St. Louis to -'ash vi lie*. a.nc'- the amount ssnL was a':)olied by tiie 
Co8mo->olitan Association, to oay aseessmentp Ir^vied a ainet his 
certificate, No notice to pay further assef^sr-ent was r ceivad 
by himuntil about August 36, 1007, -/hen he was notilijsed by 
the p. ecretary of tlie association that it claimed a balance of 
60^ due on the July assessment, and tha full assessment made 

for t e month of August, Tlie secretary also sent him n go called 

— 1 
health certificste, or reinstatement on. account of a forfeiture / 



iaaal ^beauani: erfd; ,xf*jBei) atrf c:' • ^tlj^sy ;trf3ie ^irocfA 









s BSn 3ii rioiriw x^^ ^nox^iscnosp i; s;tf (fq©^ bexusjti ©i-fJi ^***^^*'^^'rBlrT^ 



^•oneblBS^t airf "3:0 aegnjarfo e 

Si. X^inriBr: 

-Civ --.. , 

— lom ^o 0on.t;,vijjs ■, I JL Jilt!':' e IS ■ -jauo - 

,YS«Offl &tai9'£ ategs biuov aoiif e.:: 
> : boxieq elbJffw eHcf '^XljBottOi 

iii bsJtXrrs eiBVr mirf ■>•;'- ' : -^ ■ i: 
-Oifr- ^SjJu oinoot; ■ '.>Ku r.ox. 

ffio-i- C -orrre"i alrf Tsrf-^ • ."■"' , .! : 
©uj vo veJtXqqjB 9M^ iaee johq^' 
Bid *8rtxJB7,JB heiveX aJflemeseaajB '^ii 



[ivlg ©lOl^on s tnott 
.trocowaoO & " 



; 3- irir .' -J- raid Ylii'on 

"" .qlriaascfraera aiii 

utn: ■•:"• ??si» ©i't lo ^nscfi^jBq 



Ycf bsaillion b ," .'^ -*., 73x14 Juodfi ittauaild ^[d 

asaas yXx/T. ©rfJ- no ©xib %0Q 
^ . ^aJ.f3wA lo dJTioio e -it zol 



... 'iv -. ^ __ L«. & .k^.^... uj,r^^^ 



of his riembership. This health certificate he was dir cted to 

sign and return. Thereupon about September firet, he rsmitted 

to the secretary the aDiOunt, fhich the Association figured 

covered the \alance of the aasesament claiMed by the a380ciation 

to be due for July, and the assessment claimed by it J'or August 

■.And September, At the sarre time, he signed and retiirned tiie 

80 called health certificate, changing it, however, by 'vriting 

across the printed warranty coricerninf!,' his health, :.iie words: 

"Miscarria e of notice of aasessmftnt", T.ie insured marie remits 

ca-noes after that ti>e, fully coverinr the amounts -^hich .vers 

assessed against him, by the aseoc^ati n, fcr the reiiaining 

months of the year 1907, and part of January 1908. He mea or 

Ddcember 11, 1907; and prooer proofs of 'ieath as required by 

the rules of the as80c:;ation , were r :ide out and sent to uiie 

association. 

About five weeks after the death of :" e ina rea, one 

Adaa ^ . C. Sc^^ del . who was a director of tr.e association, called 
obtained 



upon a'jj i' BiiJ L iiO j and ateaxixBat from her a releiisa of hex cj-aim 

under tlie insurance certi ic^te, by oaying her -500, Aft^r.rwards 

^,^:U.-M^.^J^.^^:^:-f*' ( \ v * y^ L- 

on :he 8th, vlay of December, 1908, tlie appdlloo comm enced a ' .^v-. 

3 it in the circ it court of Kane County aiT.ain8t the Coertiopoiitan 

Life Insurance A-^f?ociation, to raoov^r the o.iiance =ihe ciaiiied 

to be d :e her on her *3C0C oertific-te, Fu ^ons w^te issued in 

this suit and aerved on J, 0, Myers, Pecemcer 10, 1908 as ?i.-.ent 

of the defendant association; the president of the defendant 

association not being found in 'he county, Tl.e ssrvice vas 

made by leaving a copy of t.e suriraons with "lyers, • Jch cony 

he mailed, postage prepaid, in .;.n snvelopehaving a r^^turn card on it 

to the address of tae secretary o" the association, , , Krappe 

Freeport, Illinois, 

A notice of the suit v/hich had also been compiej. '^ / 



C'S b&io lib ejaw aii 

e - • 

-;t-i«reT ebjsni fieiup 
sae* rioirfv/ Bin. 

■",nin i .. b'i 8 I..' 
no ijsir ei' .80kU xajSuJi 
>: bs'Xiupe'i •« fC*«9.b 

Jbe-i: - .' '■ Brief revoo$x,oi ^ij^Wfiws^&i. aau£;iv<^ slJtil . 

fan r 66 80«X 4©! iscfmeoea ^sxev^f ,0 .(. ;i.. ijevist ii^i .JJUJ|{ eixJ* 



ri;j ngie 
■J Mjxaa&^oes i;i.;f oJ 

■ ■ ■■^' oJ 

.) uUqsi to ai.^ljsBpeilfl'' 

Si. *«&e); &i^w ... a BriiJnoii! 
• • . .sdra©o&a 



■" ©oiYiea b "" 



^ tti: JbHyo"* ^flJt^ci Jon aoxcriioqeej^ 



also sent, in the regular course of mnlla, by A»i**ii«*J-8 attorney 
in a letter, postage prapaid to the address of the Association 
at Freeport, Illinois, on rec{5Kiber S, 1908, 

No ateps were taken by le association, to defend a^^ainst 
the claim of the aftpoll es ; tind on June 1, 1909, a judgn-sent was 
rendered by default, Against the association, in favor of the 
apj& ell e e , for ^1605,25 and costs of suit; and this judgment 
is- the one soujjht to be vacated by aHpuliunt, 

It also aiJpearif -c T>pim-^r^^?a» tri-^rr f^ft^ tnat on the 9th, 
day of September, the ajw-e-i-itm-t- entered into a contr/ct -/vith 
the Cosmopolitan Life Ins'trance At;aociation, v.'hereby in conoioer- 
ation of the tr-rinsfer to it, of a^l Lhs asseos of the Coaaio-' 
politan Association, it agreed to aBsume a^l the liabilities 
of the association for death claims then ex:i sting, r that might 
thereafter exist. On the oasis of this contract, the s^ij> o l 4»<t, 
on May 6, 1910, conm^nced the suit referred to in tlie bill 
of complaint ar^ainst the a">yoxl a nt , to enforce payuient of her __, 
judgments and the nrosefutlon of the la tte r suit t ,e a'V'tiileiirf 
aiao sfffeldyto enjoin in this orooeeding, I 

In support of t1ae claim ^or the relief sought by the 
bill of compxaint, appeliSbnt contends that there -"yaa a forfeiture 
of the insurance certi^'icate held by the insured, on account of 
tae failure, by t'le insured, t<:^\Pay the assessments due for 
July and August 1907; and that thV insured, by signin;: the 
reinstatement ;ind helolbh certificate^ dated September 1st, 
askRloi acknowledged that these aseessfsnts ^'.'ere due; and that 
he nad failed to pay hem; tl at he'ther^^y also ackndwiedged 
that there was a forfeiture of his certificate; t])at in the 
reinstatement certificate, the insured tnade isertain v/arranties 
concerninfi 'he condition of his health, which v>^re untrue; ad 
that it Was exoressly agreed in said ksjtxii health certificate 






nc.ti- 



-oqeett li' 
aJbw tfte 'liBlo dill 

-lebfce orasoO Qdi 

^»9. , . ■sd-'ljBe-ieiL'- 

Ir 

- - ^t 



X/e". veJ-Wfi; 






86 sd^AJenJLbx 

iTJtnasouoo 



that if those warranties were found to be untrue, the membership 
certificate should he thereby avoided; and that these warrai.tiee 
were untrue, and hence the certificate ^ae avoided. It is fur- 
thermore urged hy appellant, thrtt after trie death o.' t e in-^ 
sured the appellee, in conBideration o-^' the oay?rient to her of 
jlSOO released tJie Cosmooolitan Agaociation from ail j ..rther 
JtxxlsiixtiBK liability under ti.e insurance certificate in question. 

Appellant also ciaiTis, that the judgi'jent ■'•'hich -vo.s 
Obtained by the appellee, arainst tne Cosmopolitan Life I^-eurance 
Association, '^ae invalid because J, 0, Mvere, the person u on 
whom t'e surnmona was served as ■■> ent of the association, v/as 
not in fact, its apent, nnci that therefore, tiic court dad not 
h;-ve jurisdict on 0+ the association, -^s a party defendant in 
t'le suit. 

We will first consider tha quest n of ths forfeiture 
of tiie insurance certif ic-^te. It is clear tuat the right xtac 
claimed to forfeit the certificate, '"'as on account of t:ie ine-.red'a 
failure to pay aseessr-canta to tiie assoc -tion, n i :at those 
aasesBiTients were based on the adv-.noed r::tea fixed bv' the 
association, under its new by-laws. As a 1.-. tter 0^ Is-al right, 
tua association could not snforce those advanced rates ai^;airiat 
t;is insured; t 3 only rate for '/hich he was liable was the 
ra^e fixed by his ins .ranee contract; 'md this in-yurance contract 
•was embraced 'othin tie terms of his a 'plication for effibership, 
his inembership certificate, und the By«=LaW8 of he Knights of 
;t e Olobe lo.itual -en^fit Ae«>cciation as t.-sy existed at tie 
jtirne of his 1 ecoraing a m«mber. By this contract his a5se3Bment 
was fixed at '.he rote of ^1, per oseessirient; and he v^as not 
lObliged to pay rhe high it rate of :i;l,70 par asse-sment, -/hich 
■was fixed subsequently, by t \3 new by-lu-'/a , (Peterson v Gibson 



-i.r' . . . 

-.-IX 



U 4. u iirf- .. 

5 X« J" X o 

I 

:J'n3."K?i , . i ; -.'..W: 

" "^ 1 



10 



191 111. 365; Covenant Mutual Life Aesn of 111 v Kentner, 188 111 
, 431.) Furthermoxe it does not appear b,,.at e ris.tice cf asesss- 
menta, hich is fiiovideo Tor bySection 4 Ox Article 5 o •., e 
By«LavV8 or tiie Knights of tlie Globe mutual Benefit A'-3aociation, 
■Wets I'lailed ;,o his post office audrees; and this was rs'^^ired, 
before a forfeiture could be deciorec- inci p.ijde iegaxly ejie ;tive. 

It is clear, t;;at the rig,\t to "ecj-.ire ^; f orf eitui'a^ -vus 
dependent on fJis .giving of liie notice, ■s v, eil j.s t.ie ia,ilare 
\ of the inaured to f)uy t;i« assessment ^.'liich he was obliv,eu. to pay. 
, (M, W. Traveling V^^in'e Asa n, v Bchulti, 148 111. 304.) For- 
^ fait .ras are not f avor ^ri m luw, 

"Bef e iue > sfeiiae o "' orfeiture because of non-pay'^'ient 
of aaseasioents can prevail, it iiiuet not only aov>ear that every step 
necessary to conetltute a lethal aaaeBsment has been Lr'ken, bjit 
also that the msmber alleged to be in default has been nv.ti..;i3a 
in the precise giianner specified t/y ti,s rules ajici x =gu.vations of- 
the order," (Farmers' Fed, v Croney 106 Ixi. App, 435.) 

If the S5.00 sent by -o]ie ins.ued itout the P.Btn. of April 
1907 paid the raised ae-jeaement, 'athin oO cents, to .vnu iuoluding 
t;,e moi th of July, taen according to ti.e rate wr,ich the i/isured 
/ wa.8 obliged to pay, t :e amount rj^nt jvas auT'ficient to pay his 
le^al assessment, not only in full for July, but a Lao 3 or Au.t,u9tj 
and hence hie assessment lor July and August, -b :-i matier oi 



equitable right, must be oonaidered as paid. No right of ior- 
feiture therefore existed; and it is bbvioue tl.at i there was 

i no right of ^Bxikktt&xa Corfelture on .account o" non nayp ^nt of 

I 

' aseeaaments, nonco couK be le,cv;=.lly enforced. Nor "vaa t .e insured 

estopped to 'eny the forfeiture because he :iac; signed the re- 
instatement health certificate, (Cov, Mut, Life Aa^'n v Tuttls, 
B7 Ai^, 309.) If the Cosmopolitan Association had no iejal 
right to enforce a forfeiture of the insured's letnberahip in 
ti.e A'380ciat3on, then it follows, that he bu.i not Jjfelose such 



xil tsaX ^'X9ttttt9Jl V III S.0 naeA stW X&w;tJjM i-nsnevoO iSac ,XiI X8X 
-saeee- lo sox vieriJ-xtft ( .XC* 

^ibf aXiant e<dW 



9liJ 



-'IJ'^. 



-.^/'^i''i^*-^%'* 



1. ;tiel i 



iro 8noxJ.8^ir^, 

( ,c.iih ,viqA ,xxl ij'. 
; .riJ-BS e.i • i-jjoai;- be 

«iiu x^'''. ^^■^ inn I 



:ai)!\ia!.iBa.B& "Xq 
:- ai 

ibM voex 

ij" OJti ario 

..;J:Icfo eisw 

i-its/neseea-B Xjb^sX 



'J,iX:':m\,>q nofi 



')) .dJvt; 



l9ti.-ii.«C*«-iXXS 



on , 

I 

ih'MBfi9B%Ji ; 

f 

£)eqqo;taa \ 
' Hi Bat 1 



o\otritt «rf J'ii^XA 



11 



niemberahipj am that the Asaooiation had no right to exact a 
oartificata to reinstatement, or require t/:.e i sured to ^ign a 
reinatateraent certificate; ond 'A^e signin . o-^:' the certific-.te by 
the insured, had no ler.al effect v;; atever u^v^on the ststua of hia 
member ahip, \ / 

Moreover it anpe-rs clearly, from ine certificate itself 
that the inaurad 6\fi. not int-nd to m5.> e, ;-.nd as ^- "-att-r oi iact 
did not DiMke 'he ••/arranties concernir.'., hip lit;a.lth, vtijch jt is 
claimed that he made in ^he certificate. By vri ing across tue 
1 printed v^orda xaxsxxniK containing t '6 arrantiea rr.entioned, the 
J worda "raiscarriaj^e of notice of assessment" ne clearly in^iicated 
4 an intention to ; void nakinr an^, statement concerning Ihe warrantiea; 
and that he axneclsd his r eingtatdr.ent to ; e baaed uoon tae sup- 
posed miacarriag;e of a nciice to hin^, of tiie aQ8e--3ment '"/e 
are tnerefore of opinion, taat ihar h /yji a.B no ie;ai forfeiture 
of the memberehip of i e ir.aured; nor of his certificate of 
jinaurance, _ // '\ 

Upon the question of the -validity 6f the release, it is evi- 



dent that the circui'.stancea tihder -'hich tW^s re.Leaae -vas obth-ined, 
and the me na employed in detaining it, .is shown oy t^ie eviaence, 
rendered it invalid.! W^ien ths dirf-ctor o- cos /Seaociation, v«ho 
journeyed to Tenneeaee for t'.e purpoae of obt-'ining this rexs^'se 
oame to the a ^TiJeilea, «he ^'as in a dietrsaaed and nervous condition 
bor. ering u-^on --ental and physical collapse. She was stiil 
suifsring from t/e eff-.cta of a physical affliction j .vhlch had 
befallen her; was greatly depreaaed on account of tue :ieath of 
her huaband, and worried •/ecaiu'e of t e i.Llnese of har son, 
and trie iilnees of her mother, whom she wae nuraing, and who Tvaa 
under her immediate oare, ^t ^ n f i v i r ^ g nr^ ^ wh ourg- - ir hat^ ^i e was »0 
weakened and narvoud aa to be incapable of tea the n-:r ml exer- 
oise of uer will power; and, incapable, on 'ccount of her condition 
to transact business of importance, I-*^ wan won this i« eak-y~ioj;^lQ?n / 



IX 



airf io 8i/.^?ja arlt noqii" leve on b.:A ^i>»Xue^I »ril" 

llsaJ-l 3&BOi'\ tii»o 9dt well ^rXiaslD ' nevOeioM 



*0£l io 

6-i; ^ X.-.- ft .J 3£xln'i90na 

eii/J^islio on aa 



n 'io •gjBiiiBoaiw" BfaT^)* 

.^-oaliu beeoq 

.jlHJtq-o lo e-xoteisriil' ere 

;B8'xue : o qlrfeioJm lo 



^banir^Jdo bj8» eBssIei »Jtjrrcf rfoirfw Xfriihjj teontJ-prijuoi 



"tsb 



e^oIqoiE- an em Bdf ba& 
.JbxlBVni ^t beiebnei 



^aousctva ant ■fd ^woric 

ofl»» ^noitelooasfi t i 

eB.sele-i bxp.t "gntnt'-sdo lo &BOi 
fioxtibfioo suorrtn bay. bB8EST>fe 

XlJt^B «JBv ■ .eBCi-I..or Xeoi 

ban rfoci' j nottoxlYlB iBOtpyrfq js to B^oanta Bdf atOTt'* gnlisllu^ 

*o dtb9u 9iit J.0 iauoooa ito oeeee^'iBb yXJ«s i-xeri nsXials/ 

iHOB tf'i'. tr. BBBfrXlx » j 1 o B -ii '. -)ne ^bff^cfBxrrf'' I6ri 

1 ^anisTi/n BBw s/i'B i-norfw ,aenc^om -isr^ to BeenXXl arit i)a£ 

■'Qxla_ fio«»**-HW^- -efrtf ,aiJ80 B-eibsm-iX TBri trebni/ 

". 8i; fcuovien bftjj bansiJSBW 

■ ; ■'-.■ r o ^Bicl.v t^ewoq XXJtw le-i to ealo 



13 



and inoapa,citat&cl ffomani, that the valiant dir^^otor of/the Co8» 
niopolitan Ineifranca Associatiori ooncentrated h.isVundfmnaired power 
of intellect' and argument: aAd he ast o;it to 'jon^inoe her that 
the AssoGlation vfas really /icing :'.n act of i rtnovolejice in oayiim 
her ^500 instead of the f3000 Yhich waa du.e her, ' She 3Af s he 
told her that she had no legal cxaira agyij^st the Association, 
and could not collect anything; tiiat slie could not afford to ;~o 
to law, because if she went to law, tue case vjoul.: oj cried in 
I.vlinoia, and would take perhape six years to dJspoBe 0:1 it; 
that her husband had coninnitted perjury, in swearin,;, to a 
health certificate; :^.nd, if ehe brought suit, lier husband ■'vould be 
branded as a perjurer; rind she, .- s a perjurer's «. ife; tiiat sue 
could not afford to hrve a law suit which would Jia^'race her 
children, and her husband; and if alie '.'id not Uike the -5 offered 
to her, she Vfoulc f.et nothing. Fie admit^t at he toxd her in 
the negotiations for the pettler^ient, tr.at her husband had gworn 
to Bometiiing that was fnlea, in ti.e health certificate; ;ind 
tha.t it v/oulcl be better for her to nn^ke thi := settle' ant; and that, 
in her weakened md enervated con:^ition of body ;'nd mind, which 
ha was f ui xy aware of, ne talked tc iisr for an hour Lind a half 
to induce her to make the settlement J AndX there/ is no - oubt^ 
that 3he was induced -^o sign the release becaua/ he iiri retieed 
upbn her t;.e belief, tiia/t he was acting in he^ ^tereet; .-ind 
by playing u on her feera, in making repreayntatio^ke .vhich were 
faiae, A rslease from liability, obtained under theay circ-.jn- 
atancea, cannot be 3u8t.\^^ in equity « 

It is not neceaaary to diacues at length the otiier point 
raiaed by a;.jpellant; namely, that Mj'ers, t'le nerson uoon •roceea 
waa served as a;;ent o-^ the Association, -vaa not legally the agent. 
The proof qhows, tliat Myers attended to a number of matters for 
tiie Aasociation that persons who are a.-.-ents usually attend to. 



81 



\ 
,noi;fBXcc.. ...... .; ... o:. t .... : .-.di XhA bLoi 



.i .bsiicf 9.-:^ '-.Jtio . «K.An r; '' , ^ . _t , ... .„ y-iroaJ ,#J8X C 

.... ^ :._ iiabrfjslftf 

.fn ? HW .* . .bill OS 

.. ...... .yd* ©da ^-lerf oJ 

_ . ,._ ^^w erf 

,3- 3a: . 3>r:^T; o: zoisbni'df 

.^fc.3': . 3.6W ©fie ' j'flrfi' 

; ' . " . : e.iJ T6fi ndqu 

i be vie 8 aj8^ 

^awoffp tooiq difT 

- :.;3 noi;tsroo88A siij- 



13 



such as takkng anplicationa for ngmberahlp, collactin; luea, and 
rgmitting tuetr! to the Asaociation; also praparing . r of s of death, 
and. taking charge of them for the Associ-.tion; ..nc. acsiving tne 
drafts in return, from the Association^ to pay for death Cxaims, 
for deliv ry to the beneficiaries; hs .i.ao took rsieases oi auch 
^ claime for tJia Asaociat:Lon» He undoubtedly stood in t..e position 
of an agent of the Association; anri ^ould be en^ra^iy regarded 
as such; certainjiy outside parties, anC. the public generally, 
would be Justified in so rs.arding him. 

In Crov/ley, CooV & Co, v Pumner, 97 T:l1. App, 304, the court 
says, in passing u:-.on L,.e q estion of a-ency in connection 'ith 
service of croceest 

*Th6 iangapge of the statute le ..road ***** it should 
receive a lib-eral construction to eff -jot vvaat 7»a3 clearly the in- 
terition of the legislature to ^.aoure. Cor'>orations v.oin;. business 
over "ide areas of territory, >^re nractically beyond t e jurisdic- 
tion of local coarts in such territory vvaere ti.s buPinesa is Jons, 
unle-.s tl.ey can be reached by service a )oj[i tueir repreaentatives 
there found, T:.at a representative for limited puroosee raay 
be an agent for purposes of service under the statute, is pxainly 
seen from the fact tl.at not only a [general :'igent n.ay be served 
but also any '.[^ent may be served," 

It is Hpparent that Myers, at tne tir^e o.^' th^ service of 
the surfjnons, geemed to regard hi.T.eelf as an agent; he made no 
Objection to the service on tiie ground that ne was not an a;,.ent; 
and did '.viiat any agent ^ould do, aft.-^r he was served -- transmitted 
the copy of the su-mons to '.lie proper 0'"ficer of t.:ie Assoc lation. 
An t:;e Association see^Ds to have re- arded the service of tne 
su- mons u-'On Myarg, as -^ ant, as nro^r; for it nsvar questioned 
such service. Tne Association undoubtedly not only had notice 
of t .e service, but of t;;e commencement of the f3uit. There ia 



'». w9«vea^s-i iooi- o»X^. au i»eiXj8*i:Di1sn»a' e4^ Oj X*!: ^'i-s^ 3:'.. 
floia-xeoq e..j ..i booia xLb&j diuoottu aH «noji:^j9xooaBA sii- - iJtj^Iti,/ 

Jfcdti^^&i Y-l^-^-«i^«» ©of" Wi/or 6rrjB i«o|*AiooesA eriJ: to irrs;;.; a& lo] 
^AfXIjsienes oilo'jjQ arLt bnf- ^BBifrnq, nplBiiSO x^nXi^i'xao jrfoiis t 

*ixfo ,i.0£ ,q:, ''G ^t©nc(Uir8 v .oO A ijtQoQ ^ysIwo^iD nl 

rf^i". rtox*')snnoo ai vona b lo fioi;J-Barfp snj ao?M aniaasq nl t«'>iAe- 

:«68ooao lo soxviea- 
bijt/orie j i ' * * * * baoid ai e^i/^JsJ-a siw lo egsn^n-ex eriT" 
-»ii- #ila- v-i^tujaAU a*;w j--t,'* taet^B &f U^iiovi;tauoo XjS'xadii £ »yi&3c 
eeaniai/d 3nJtoi> snoxJ-^ienridO ,«,iifO«e oo ©x*j4^£X8i3©X' ••iiJ^ '^o nolii^ai 

^arroi «x et.^iTi«»j.cf »nS a-xailw XTatiiasiJ' rfoi/j? ni eiiuoo Xsoal xo .fSoiJ 
aavijiijnBfiS'iq&'i riedi fyo<.,i.i ©oivxse ^d Jbario^sT ad a^Q- yiail^.v ffia^ftx/ 

y-E"i aeeorTuq bftlmtl loJ svii-js.tnaaeiqs'x *i i-x; T .hrri/o'^ a^s 
"{Xaxjbxq ei ^eJxfi'iJ^a aiii^ -labnu aoxviaa- lo seeoHiijq 1.0 ..- .. 

taviaa s<i x^n Jta9;iF Xja^ceas^i t ^Xno toa &Siit *o«l , aii« aioal izaa|L 

" ,£)6v'iae .»ji Y-Sffi i^na^;; ^{Jas oais tud 
lo eoxv'xas ru; '^ o emlj sri^ if» ^'axaiYM J,Axi;f *fi»i*qq.:s; el 51 

Oil ai>i8in 9ii j^-itagK nx4 ax; iXeamid! biBsei oi bfi&fivt jaaoncni/fi e. 
(tnagja ajb Jon aew ari fjani bciVoiQ,efii Ho ©oxv^ee ©iii- oJ- noxfoetdo 
bettimenai^ — bavxee naw af{ np^lx^ ,ob !.<Xuov J-nft^i^. xf^fi J"-**^'^ bx^.i^f- 
,:iOca'«xoo8eA ei i ro "xaoil'o a^r^oig : ano- ua a^;'' "lo xtjoo a 

■..- lo ©DJtvTpe fniS he'p'j^i^ e'i svBd oj- • -sen Koid'aJrooBftA erf;^. w. 
r^snoitss y.^-: .1 liaf^o'tf; a.'3 ^ihit: .^-jievM no'-;xf anora.-'^Jja 

."r-3 j-oa y(£bsiduob:j! noxd"AixooafiiA ,;.c.fviee lioua 



14 



in the record, which can rsbut the presumption that the Aasociation 
received the copy of the sximmona, ■vhich vae rriailad by M- ers to ita 
secretary, in .lie course of mails, Nor ia there anything to 
contradict the assumption, that tne Association rsoeived tae notice 
of the coinraencement of the suit contained in the letter v,hich 
was mailed by anpelles's attorney, p-ata^^e prepaid, about the 
tir's of the service of the euinnions. If the Association thought 
it ha.d the right to qwestion the lepality of th-- esrvice of t'.e 
su/rimona, it had ample time and ooportunity, let een "ecembsr 19 
^906, and the first day of June 1209, to oo so. Not uving 
availed itself of its o portunity, in tae court whera the suit 
was pending, the A-iBociation clearly was guilty of laches; and 
J laches is a bar to rslief, in a court of eiL.ity. (Allan v Smith 
73 111. 331; Sis Blackburn v Bea.1, 91 111. 434; Higgina v Bullock 
73 111. 306; Walker v Kretzin^er , 48 111. b02,) Furtusrmore, 
a court of eq.iity will not land its aid, to aat cisioa a judgment 
at law, for want of proper service of process, unxess it appears 
that there ie a rreritorious defense to txie judgment; or to the 
ciaiffi upon '.7hich 'ohs judgment ie founded. Thia oc.xine i3 ^vell 
settled, dnd 7/as upheld b this court, in tre Cr.ee of Cadixiac 
Automobile Corcpany v Boyrton, 143 111. A ;p« 381; anc the bee. aion 
in tliat case was aftsrwari affirmed by the guprems court in 340 
111. 381. 

It is apparent ''rom the record, ti.at there is no nisri- 
torioua defense to a -^e^lees claim, or to the judgiront which 
appellant seeks to vacate and annul. It '<,-ag antirely ^roper 
for a vpexlee to file her croRS hill, . nd 5.ak for affirmative 
.relief in this proceeding, becr>uee such r^-lief pertains to, and 
is a part of, the subject r^atter of thia suit, ',^/here a court 
of equity has jurisdiction of the parties, md the Bubjact 
matter of the litif^ation, it has authority for the purpose of 



OJ- \^aid)xa& eiefU ei xoVf ^aiijfjw' to ssxroo s ^ ya^.taioea 

ftoi ioft »dd' £ievi&o«n iioJttf.8rooBBA ©jiJ &Biif 4jko cd'qfiu'aafi ©aJ^ ii-ocl«a*noo 

eitf *jjOd« ^biaqei-q e^^-Bd-e-oc ^yen'sod'J'tfi .=)*eftl.i'sqn=- v^i belinnr e 

S!\i 1o 90ivi9« l: iJ-ilso-sI © ij nox3"»m/p o;f Srigxi ©.fJ' bad tt 

■Tivij.! JoM .OB Ob 6i .2?r.l «fn;T. -to \6b Je^i 'n;.. ^80e«6 

ijn.= ;«ario*;I 1o Y*Xii/'} as'A v.Li«e.; o .itox;t£.i:oo«!*»A en J .i^ihnssq' bbw 

iJxTtS V n&XIA) ,xi^i' r© lo cfttijoo /- rti ^Iftixtx ocf aw; > el aeilo^X 

k'coiXij^. V aA-tfj..-W i*'i;* .iXl XR ^Xiea V xiiirrf'^ojsItT sufS jXiiS .XXI SV 

^sioatenJiJo'T ( ,SOr; .Xil aj^ ^tife^^xsJeiX v 'xejiXisW jSOS ,XXI £V 

jftsorsfaut A ei^ie/-, ;Jea oj ^ht& Bit btieX Jofl XXtw Ajjlifpe ro J^ii/oo £ 

aieeqqa it ee&Xnjj ^aeeoo'xu'- ro eoivx&e t©c|otq lo ifnjs'.w Tot ^wbX ia 

©tij 03" 10 ;tfieB!3li/[, arij o* eectelah 8i/o£T:o;fi:ie?i! jb oi Bthdi t&iii 

Lie* sx arriijoc BiriT ,J>«biti/o'i ax (^rramafeJi/t ^^^ Aoldm stooxs miaXo 

o^LltbtiO 'io ea.-o e. .? at ^^li/oo- eirij cf bieriqx/ a£«' bfiB 4b©X;tJ-»8 

noiei-0»'^ frii ;ni.= jISC .qt-^A .XII ^^L ^nojrnYofl v Y^jsqatoO ellcfoaio^x/A 

O^S nx ♦'Xijor) eitisiiiua s.ld ycf bewTi'^'r^ jb^jsviaj-'te esr es.60 tsA3 n't 

,xat ,xii 

-lason on ei ei&rf^ o-«r(;^ tbtooai srfif m>'x\ ^rrsijscrn« ax tl 

rior/fw J-fTi -iT^fit/c 8.!:t oJ 10 ^mlKio aweXIe^r'-.B ci earci^'isl^ axroxaoJ' 

zeqoi -■ yi^ititiB sev- #1 .Xxjxinjs bitA ©;tj80Bv oif Siiess ifrtjeXXaqq* 

bvidximax'i'ia ro'^. i9K har. tXIlcl eooio T«ri aXit o;t &6Xi&q<^jB tco^ 

easi-fW tttua 9tcLi lo as^^J-orn jL>*»f:rfi;a an't ^to Jxaq: a al 
+ '•', ^^rfL^r eri^ Jbfi'; ^aax^fifiq &i .; 'o noi&otbdXxx.l eerf yJ-iupe lo 



15 



adrtiinistering equitable relief, to adjudicate all the rights of 
the nartiQB which are involved in tiie liti,eation. (Coienan v 
, Connolly, 343 111, 583») The court did not err in clscreeintv the 
relief orayed for by -e-^pelle© in h^r croea bill. Appellees claim 
and judgment wae one of the liabilities which aopeiiant had 
assumed under ita contract v.-ith tlie Cogniopolitan Asgociation, 
It was, therefore, proper, in as muoh as the claim and judgment 
were valid, and a subsisting oblif-ation agairat 'he Cosmopolitan 
Aeso oiation, -nd under the terms of appellant's contract 
it should be required to pay the same. 

We find no error in the decree, and it should be affirmed, 
:, ' Decree affirmed. 



. ^Y-tXonn 
lot bBxstc IbII 

a:ti iBbttu bBtmiB 

iiBoue ^liLav ex 

^noitisio OS 
, ' p&i B<5 biuoi 

,Lk an eW 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, | .. 

SECOND DISTRICT. (' ''''" I, Chiustopher C. Duffy, Clerk of the Appellate 

Coui't, in aud for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand aud affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the yeai- of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



^ .-^ 



Ifhsre & benefit insurance aertifisste providlej tbat, the insured should be liable 
for assessTents for TortuBry olftiTS aosor5in| to the table of rateK prescribed in 
the by~lBWB of the associetion, and thbt the insured's application then on file in 
the office of the associstion; said certificate, and the by*-I&vcs of the association 
shall constitute and only contract between the insured and said association, and 
such association thereafter changed its' nsTe end adopted new by-laws inereasirl its 
rate of assessTrent, held that the only rate for which the insured under such eer- 
tifica-te was liable was the rate fixed by hi& insurance contract as evbraced within 
the terffs of his application for TeTbership, hie ireirbersbip certificate, and the 
by-laws of the association as they existed at the titie of his becondn^ a ireiiber, 
and he was not obliged to pay the higher rate fixed subseousntly by the new by--l&ws, 
and such certificate was not liable to forfeiture for the insured's failure to oay 
sueh higher rate* 

Forfeitures are not favored in law, and where the by^-lE.ir,s of a benefit insurance 
association provided that: assessirsnts for Tiortuary claiTs should be uoon notice 
Tailed to the pcstoffice address of the insured, held that the right to declare a 
forfeiture of a. certificate issued by such association was dependent on the 5ivin| 
of the notice as well as the failure of the insured to pay the assessrert which he 
«tts obliged to pay,' 



Where a benefit insurance association has no ri^ht to declare a forfeiture of 
an insurance certificate, sueh association rray not exact a reinstatensnt health 
certificate fro-n the insured, and such insured is not estopped by bavins signed such 
health certificate from denying the forfeiture of his insurance certificate, nor 
has such health certificate any legal effect whatever uoon the status of his iren- 
bershioi 






,«.}« 



n^lsfffc uj Jivi-"t si'^J i^'^-'^ fciS'^ J^sti' :o s«8f 



...•■,.j ? ieliol s QtAlo^l g.J J.'i|;T 0!i 3^/1 (iot t.3.isc?3!i sanaiuani- t ■ 



■ 

The jsords "misosirri&gs of notice of &ssessfi!ent" writteri by the irsurejl unjer a 
jetiefit insurence certificate across the printed words contBinins KBrr&ntiss as to 
health in s> health certificate sent to and signed by hii for the puroose of rein- 
stateTent under the supposition th&t he was in default for nonpaytrent of an asssss- 
senti clearly indicate his intention to avoid lakin^ any stateirent concernin4 such 
mrranties^ and that he expected his reinstaten-snt to be based upon the supposed 
iiscarria^e of a notice to hiti of the assessrrsnt, 

A release of liability of an insurance association signed by the beneficiary un- 
der a benefit certificate issued by such association cannot be sustained in equity 
where such reieese was procured fro-r such beneficiary through nisrspresentaLions 
by a director of such association while such beneficiary v.bs so laboring under 
physical and -cental distress as to be incapable of norital gxsrcise of her will pow- 
er and of transacting business of iirportance.- 

Where service of suirrrons in a suit al^iinst an insurance corporation was rrade, 
the president of such corporation bein$ without the county, oy Isa'ving a cocy of 
such suTtrons with a person within the county who had been attending tp matters of 
such corooration as agents usually attend to, and who received such copy of suT^rons 
without objection and transmitted saire to the prooer officer cf such corporation 
nearly six tr.onths prior to judgment on default in such suit, and no Question was 
raised in the court where such suit was pending by such corporation as to such 
service, held that such corporation was guilty ot such laches as bars it in equity 
froT, relief against such judiirent in the absence of a Tsritoripus defense. 

ft court of eouity will not lend its aid to set aside a jud«T3nt at law for want 
of DTOoer service of orocess unless it aooears that there is a aeritorious defense to 
the judgment or tp the clairr upon which the jud^trent is founded. 



oi a< seiJrtsTjen ^firnra.Jffoc s'aon tsinitq si.t ^sotca sJaccli-Jiso sonieiusni Si') 
-Tien lo esoqioq e^U -ic'i Tirf yd fcangia fcrue oJ Jrjas aJaGilciTsc fli 

i:33cqqua arii i-ioit/ fcesa.d ad ci ,trf43rs,J<j 'csn rei aiif fce-Jaaqns srt Jddi tfia ,3.-?:.^^; 

'iJas?ia3iia«^ erf J lo iriii o,J so? Jon =i lo si* 

vJiuoe ■>! temcaJayg ei .Jorfua rroi J.-»iOQ3ad icfjs yd taoaai eJiJci'lcJ-Tso iHefJcd t* 
2icr H\ji-!323Tqet3rr 'i,'£!OTl.^ yisionsrod dcue toi') teiwcoiq 33» g^^sjia-T -su-? 
■isLncj 5ni.iod4l os ■^■■jw vTaicnansd dciji' ;2iL'f« loiJijiacas^ :':.:s ^c TcJcen.. 
-•■■'G His ted ^0 iiHicta^s I^:!f'ic;^ Ic eld^qacnc sd oi 35 a.-jsTJaxfc IsirfST t-'-« ^<-''-" 
-i ,3CrfdJ-ieq:n£ ^c ssariiauo sMi Jcagiis 

,s^€t =jfl^ noc^^iQqTOC sonaitL'snl ns .l-:rtis--§e Ju'c s rrr ana'«,ii.iK "^c 3cx9'i.v<3 
ic \'qcc 8 i-nlve^i vn j\'^r»oc£ srfi .tuc i.tz« ^niad rroiJ^iamac -.fctis Ic .tnafci .: 
"^c sTsJJecr ci 5rj?tngJJ4 rtesd fc^d od* vincoc 9fi,t lidiiw crosTaa d 'it is anor 
3f!cr-a3 lo '{qoc Icus Eevracs'j od« ins ,eJ lieJJiS '^fliSfJsi.i ainet^ ^4 noiJaioc 
aci.)4Tca'ioc ioua "jc Teyillo isacTa arfJ jJ STias fcadixtsfliSiJ trid •cjjC.tc-. 
ij. ;tci.t38U0 err tn^ ,ii03 diog ax 4ly^3dt ■^o daar^fcoi 0.1 -soiiq s;iJ.{cii ■ii.. 

dc(j5 oJ 2^ fici.t>aioq-jac doue vd ^nrtnaa aaw rf.Ms dsug aiadt Jtoo 
ii;o2 a: Ji atfid ga aedcsl licsa Jo VJUi)| g«w aQt.ttjioqtoo dcaa Ja'lJ cia.' . 
.sgrteT^f': soOiTCdi iSJT <« 1c 3C;"?s8d3 '^rij rti iffes^fcijf dcos 



i.Tjew '5c*! nsl iz o'isTjfcyf 5 sLtae Jae Ovf fci:^ a.H trrel iof Ills ^^tf.'ir.s lo ^tocc 
J sgriele!". sooxtoiiTsr f si eisr'J isdJ giyscou .if ssslnj aa-iioo .iss leooi 



Where suit is brought by one insurance eoffpsny to vasate a jui|fner.t recovered 
B^ainst another insurance corrpany whose assets were tccuired anj liabilities as- 
sumed; by contract between the two conioaniss, by such forner coijioany, and to res- 
train a suit broii^ht a^&inst such fornjer cotrpsny to enforce such judlTent, it is 
proper for defendant to file cross bill and ask and receive effirtrative relief 
against such former conrpany under s.uch judgment and contract. 



/ 



.;.Tae^;V :J 



I'.rjrjf 



►as SKMiL ■ 



"^ 



/ 



/ 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATf COURT, 

i 

I 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, tln^e fifth day of October, 

/ 
in the year of our Lord one thousand i^ine hundred and fifteen, 

within and for the Second District/of the State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon, DORRANCE DIBELL, Pi^esiding- Justice, 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , ^/ustice. 

iHon. JOHN M. NIEHAUs/ Jus t i ce . 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFff, Clerk. 

2 

E. M, DAVIS, Sheriff. ^ 




V / 







/, rfr^ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

,,;_■.. .. the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



. 30 X >t 9;_f i'. 3,0 1 I: J. Sft^'i . J J2SIC' 



XVAa 



% S', ^ 



no 



Gon. No. G07C. 

Julia Jacobson, ar)pollant, 

vs Apijeal from LaSallo, 

Joseph W. Raisey, appelloe, 

Diboll, P. J. 

Joseph M, Rahsy ov/ned a "buiiuing in tho city ci' Streator 

that had a atai^ray on t^^ cutsijie of 'cho b-aiiclin^^, Mro. Julia 

Jacobaon was en said atair^'hiy/'rhGn a bcari thsrcjof gave way 

liriler her and nlie fall throjigh t5^ the ground and v/as oerlously 

injured, Sh3 bmught , thjifi. suit agaloiot Rainey to recover aam- 

■ rre^i— 4H " . 0T g fk >r. -Sii^ filed a declaration containing three counjjs. 

A 
"Sofendant did not deinur tiioreto, but filod a jplea of not t^,uilty. 

Thoro 7/as a jury trial, and eviaenoe "or tho piain'rifi v/«.s 
heard. Plaint iTf offered in evidence a lease of aaid building 
^rom Ra^^.ey to herrueband, Barauol Jacobson. Dofandant objected 
and the court ronorved its ruling;. At the cIoog of the jiain- 
tiff'3 ovidence trie cour^ su.-^tained the objoct'on to said lease. 
Thereupon plaintiff by leave of court filed an additional count. 
The accident was on October 31, 1J12, and the adaitional count 
wan filed January "3, 1315, ^o ieriiurrer was intori)Gced tliereto 
but defendant filed a plea of not ^uilty and a plea of the Stat- 
ute of Limitations. Pl<i.intiff demurred to the plea of the 
Statute of Limitations and that denai'^rer was overruled, and 
plaintiff abided by her declaration. Tr.a plaintiff a£,ain of- 
fered the lease in ovidcnco and the court auutained an cbjoction 
thereto, and granted a motion jek by defendant to exclude all 
plaintiff's evidence and instructed tiie jury to return a verdict 
for defendant, and this was done, Motions for a new trial and 



A 



in arrest of ji;dgn,ent were denied, and defendant rh^d jud^jiiient 
in bar, and Tilaintiff bolo-;v anpoalr tJiersfrom. A - pp ^ l la a arguoe\ 
that the original declaration .Ud not state a cause of action, 
■'and tat if any cause of actioa for plaintiff has ever been 
stated, it .ift in the amended declaration, filed more tiian t;vo_^ 



... ■'' ,neO 
,d"n£XI©qq.'5 ,rtoso'ooBT, Bllifl 
»©IXjp8r-J moil I^o^qqA sv 






^Xsijoxaae sjbw i;ui; iji^oa^ ©xfj- a^ itaxatoarfd- IX©t erle JbnjB :toff T«l>nflr 

A 
• X^ii^'i ^!ii^ 'io jBsIq .6 u©iii «ljja ^oi&r&di lusieb ton btb inebneJ&O 

£tii%v llinniBlq Bdi -xoZ. ©onejjivt's i-nx» ^Xex'ii" X't '•" 

Snx^Ixuc fci£e to BaaoL i-- e&nelxT© rrx fce-xetl'o "SnflntJtrlT .ti^Bed 

-nifii<; end- lo seolo sri* ^A ,;;jkxXi;i e:^l: £)©vrteeoic JtJi/oo erit Jbrrc 

♦ 6GJ5©X i,i:<ea oi tioltooldiG oiii hecilsicme ~^tuoc ai':^ eorret'Ivo e'^li:^ 

,i-nwoo X^no i: j-xfc£>£ a^ b(hii'± fttjjoo 2;.®- ©vxi©! vd "ilithiiiXq noqx/©ir: T 

(^nyoo iBnoiilbbB sriit x.)n^ tCXeX_,,X€ todcjd'5^i|:«*no e/jw j'Xio^Ioojb' erfT 

od^etefid- ijoooir-xsd-nx a£v.- lei'rjj'jaftJ:' olf .SI6X ^GS TftjDx;n.ct JbPXll filsw 

-tficJ'v' ari:t '}.o ssXq b bnis -^^tlijii toa 'io J3©lq jb lielit tnBbnoleb tuKi 

t* :: T.O jsslq srirf^ Oiit' JbeniiMsij "ilt, .titiijXI .anoi: J.Bi^lmJtiT lo e*y 

i;;:r. ^JooXui'xevo ajsw letTjjiflofc iBdf bnfi ^rtoiiMitaiil "io eJut/jitfi 

-'io ni/j^jp llid-ni^Iq e;iT ,fiox J- £;'i/ii,oe.b -xarf ^cf &oi>icf.s m^frlxsXq 

aoia-oGr^cfo aF- bBul&i-^uB t-iuoz) 5>:I:> .en/? »oa©t>ivo nX oexJsX erf? X)Oiel 

XIx. «X)xiXoxB o.t jaxiiifre'tsiJ ^d At nox;toia Ji fce^n^ts Jbn£ ^otei-edi^ 

ioibi»v B iTiu'*c5i Oo X'^^l Q^i-J A*>e*oxr!i.*ani i^nx; eoixshivo e'lli^J-nlAXcJ 

iiHB XBxii w&;t jb lo'i «noi;;^oM ,enob 8,ew alrf^ brxc ^tn/sbrrsleb aol 



.aioil;e'rer"tt tiX^eqqjB roleo' lit d-nlx)Xq J5nB ,rcBcf nl 



years after the injury, and that the statute of limitationa 
barBthe action^ 

A plaiAtiff may a-'iend his cioclaration or file an add* 
tional count atating his cause of action in a different way 
after the Statute of Limitations hai run, «. itliout subjecting 
his action to tl^e bar of the statute, as hold in Br/ift & Co 
V Foe tor, 163 111. 50, -xnd in nany other cases« If the cause 
cf action set up by an amendment to the declaration cr by 
an additional cou:it is a mvy one and not a riere re-bta^ement 
of t,ho caufidi of action oet out in the original declaration, 
such vamendir.ent or adiitio^ial count ;^'ill net relate back to the 
cor.jiiencement of ^he Buitj and if the statute of Limitations 

has run before said nev,' oauae of action hag been stated, the 

/ 
.. / 

plea of the statute will be a defense to said nevr cause of ac- 
tion. Kylenfeldt v ITlinoin Steel Co* 165 111. 185; Mackey v 
Northern Milling Oo. 210 IJI. 115; McAndrews v 0. L. B. & F. 
Ry. Co, 3CS 111, 353. Thie rule is re~Gtated, upon the basiB 
of r,ho foregoing and other authorities, in ^akr v 'National 
Safe and Deposit Co. "'234 111, 101. One of the three eeaential 
clerfionts cf a cause cf action A'liich the plaintiff rniist aver 
^bd i'rovo in such a cause as the one now before us, in order 
to entitle him to recover, ie the sxistonca cf a iuty on the 
part of the defendant to ;.rotBct the plaintiff frcin tV.e injury 
of '.vhioh he complains. But an allefation in srch a declaration 
that it is ^.he duty of the defendant to do or to refrain from 
doing certain things is only the averment of a legal conclusion 
and is an insufficient pleading. The declaration must ctate 
facts from -.vhich the law will raise that duty. This is fully 
stated in McAndrews v C, L, S, & K« Ry, Co. siipra, and in nany 
other cases, 

There ia a cla?;s of cases where a bu' posed defect in 
a declaration, has been presented to the court aft or verdict. 

\ 



tfbbs Hii ©11^ %o JioJ:iJ5T£lo<|i) aid baeam x^'^ Hl'tp.liiiq, A 

XBV in&rol'iib a nX aoi&osi lo 88U£0 aid sniJijd-e 4ni/oo i^r.oi? 

qO 3& #^iw3 n^ Weii si) ^tt^ir^/s^s «rf,l lajt^ o* noi *ob aiil 

taQtnef Ms-ex e-cara b jton bpA Wlo jveix £ «i tf^ry/oo iBaoiilbba.as 

fidJ oi JloBcf e^xflott tpxs IXJ:w,.tWOO^^old"i4'tvB,50 tndgbn&sif' siOi;& 

QnoiiJiilmiZ'lo&tut^iU 0# !tj |)^i^fi jtii/p arfi lo *n©«©onem»aa» 

er: *3 fi»ecf a^d .flox*.p« J|o, ft^fi^ vn^jz M^a, snoleJ fusx aj^d 

-pJB 'iu eauija wen i)l4»9 oit ©ene^st^jB ©J Xliw i&iutF,ta ©ii:f lo ^©Iq 

V x^Aoxm ;S8I .Xil 391 ,00 If^^.^B. RioallXl v Jfclelnelxf -floil 

«a ^ ,a .J ,0 y 8W©7i;i}A9¥ ;^XI ^XII OIS. .op ^iXIiU nasii^ftdl 

aiastf ©if;f.noqir. 4l)o*«;)-6-©rt al ^Xin sJtilT .SSS .XXJ SSS .oO >xS 

LscoI^bVI t tMb^ nx ,8oi:fj:Tcoriitur8 '5?©ff*p l»n« jnlos»aol ©4^ %g 

XjBx^naes© B^tdi ©n't lo ©nO . .XOX ,| .oO ^xeoqeri bUB el>88 

s©vj& ^Bijffii lli:tnl£lq ©cf^ xloXxlw aol,io^ lo ©aiji^Q £ lo ata^aitaiiii 

TOMo nx ^air ©iol©cf won orro^if? 8/3 ©8«^o £i douo ax ovoaq i>tf(a 

6.1t no x^w^ -f^ "io ©SMi©/t«ixo ©ri;t 81 ^levopei o* said eXJi*nQ.jot^ 

aoli&x^La9b m doi/a jj^ noi v .3nij?Iqnioo ©rf doi^w ,\o 

moal nJtjBTl©! o;f to ^oi> oi- Ja£*;ji;i$:i.e^ ,saU *a ^c^. ^l it J^^ii 

itoiex/Xonoo I^aftX ■ _s lo tn©ma©v i/to si aanii^J nixJieo^-^Jloi; 

f»ifij.3 *3um nol ■■ -^ erf*; ,^iiJ3X>8lq *n©ioil\uacii >aj> ex iif^£ 

■^XXul ai aidT .X'^*;i. i^J<.l' o«l-oi; XJLiw yiBl adi rfolrfw. raoil 8*o«l 

. latsa ,'-■: . . , , . ,' awsiLnAaU ni bBiBi^e. 

,u©a£0 xori;tp 
aaQiJO io ea^lo xj ax oae^.'? 



The genaral principle is, *v,-hore thera is any Hsftait defoct, 
imperfection or omiscion, in an]'- pleading, whether in Dub- 
stance of forra, ''rhich v.'ould have been a fatal objection uj-on 
demurrer J yst, if the i33u© joined be such as necessarily re- 
quired, on tlie trial, proof of the facts so defectively sixtsl 
or imperfectj-y stated or oij^itted , and without which it i3 
',not to be presumed that either the judge >70uld iiroct bho 
!jury to ^ive, or the jury would 'nnve riven, ^he verdict, 
such defect, imperfection, or omiisiorr, ie cur'^d by tnc 
verdict." 1 Chitty's Pleading, 673j Ke9f;an v Kinnare, 1^3 
111, 330. In Western f^tone Co. v THialan, Ihl 111. 475, 
notwithstanding the omission from the ieGl'^ration of the nsc- 
esaary allocation of kno^'/ledge by the defendant, the declaration 
was held £;ood after verdict. So in City of Fast Dubuque v 

Burhyte 74 111. Kr)p, 99, and 173 111. 553. the declaration 
faiiad to aver either ac^tual or conetructive notice to the 
city of the defective condition of the sidewalk which caused 
the injury there involved, but it v/as hold coed after verdict. 
In ''^\ K. Fiirbana Co. v Rahre, 213 111. ^6, the declaration 
x» iatxa did not in terms aver a certain material fact. The 
defendant did not demur but pleaded t'le general ic'ue. The court 
conceded that a careful pleader would have exyiresGly averred 

no tact but hela that it wao fairly inferable from the f:ict 
alleged that that particular fact was intended to be charred. 
It v/as there said "hat on demurrer to a declaration n;ere 
inferences or implications from facts stated cannot aid plain- 
tiff, but ^hat \7here defendant aoee not demur but raises 
i:''.3uss of fact and submits them to a jury and is defeated, the 
court will indulge in intendments in favor of the ^sufficiency 
of the declaration and will regard as ouf f ioiently a.l ieged any 

aterial fact fairly and reasonably inferable from facts stated 



-cfira ai isrCJeriw »3nltiB©Iq y^JB rri ^ffftip^lSKfio noxtcolTeqffi 
noqw noi;fo©tao ljsd-^1 js nedcf «V£rf ftlu •. "lo. lo eon/?* 

kjaixxK Yiavijfoolojb oo 8:t©if 9d^ Tt6'1ooi:<i .iiil'j s:! no »i3e^ltr. 

©cCt itdeicit£> i^Xwow ©abx/^ ©rf'* torf^'-t© tBil;^ berauQetq edb* cfon 

tS-oibiev ©rit ^fievig ©v«i"l)IjK»w Y^wf; ©rft? to t^^^^ oi x^isU 

»dt x^ b^rtso Bk ^notBBiaio •so »iiol. toalxeq/nJ; ^j-oele; do:;©' 

* SSi ^©ijso^iS. V ii4s©eX.,iSV9; .jnJttjBQl'T a»,xi;^x^^ I ". *ol£qc6 

"J ^B'^h »tii ISJC »ir©lBiff V , ,©0 ©no*?? nt&te&if a% .06S",Ii: 

-osn 5^^ ^o aoii'^tfjX©©^ «ff^ aioil noxf^«imc prf^ 3rrU)ni»*arf? J:w:fc 

-^ JtokiakM&eb ©xfc^ ,SS3 .III StX bah \Q^ ;qf^ , : v oJ^rJijy*? 

ecl^ 0^ Bolton eritbsntmioo rd iBuid£ tedi Iv tBy£ 6t beii&l 

ttQ it Biai^Bh Bd^ »9eiS .III SxS ^^tAs^ v '.©0 Iniscfii . . -:I 

" ©rfT ,;^oBl•. iBlroiBm «iJBj"£©o « ifiVB Bnnttti" n't ton bifc azxt «: 

#ixroo ©rflf .Wtfsei iBtBite^ '9tii b»b»BX<t tiKl imaBii ton bib Jnr.iirreleJb 

i)^!:^©^© yleaeiqx© ©vi^ri biwow XBbsQiq LutBtso s' tBitt bBb&onoo 

' t'o£^ 9tlt m&rt oXdmBltti YXti^l sJiW *Xi*Brf:t bXert *ucf *oi?l Biit 

©T9tB noltaa/sXoo.t i^ orf teicitfmeJb no *i^?^ blSB ©T©rf? airr *I 

-nifiXq bi£ tonrxso bBiRtB Bt^&t motl atioi^fiJOiXqnil to e©on©ae^rti 

a©Bij?i tsjd XiMeb .ton a©ot tcxBlinBiBb ©lerfw J^rf-* *ucr tl^ii^ 

Mt ibBtBBlmb aJt bnB X'^^tt J^ «* ffl©riit ©4'lmc ^tOBl- "Jo ©©vesl 

pn©XaXlt ; "so'vb3: al eifnaniDnsS-nX ni 03XM-.>n4 XiXv cfiuoo 

YHB bBrso' lofttue ©« J^HAaeT IXiw bnjB noitifrelOB^ 

oXtfBie no8£©i brrB YXiiitl *ojb1 lBtr»tM'.n 



in the declaration v.-hich nay fair?i.y be preBunied to feavc baen 
proven; and if the r.atorial fact is fairly inferable ffom the 
I factii alleged and may fairly bo prentaned to have oeen i rovan 
■':he judcnient ^rill not be arrested because of "he absence of 
^^n express allegation of such ratorial fact from the ueclaration 
■ O'Rourke v Sproul, 241 111. 576. ?iLiellor v Phelps, 252 111. G30. 
^ile this -iuetjtion hac usually arisen after verdict 
r.'S it has usually been aaid in such a caae ':-iat the ■.:eclc'-ra*:ion 

good after verlict, yot there ic al-o a class of cases 
..ere ^he same prir.ciplea have b-»en a plied where the question 
arose before a jury trial. In North Chicago Rolling Mill Go. 
. V ?!onka, 107 111. 340, '-.Y.e chief ruling complained of vrao 
I bi^fore the tr'ial of the cause , and "ho question raised v/as 
whether a certain a.valt io'.al count v?as Tor a cause of action 

in ?ub?;tance other nnd different froEi tliat ?tated i:a the lirit 

I 

count. It was held that it was not, but Tas merely ?.nother mode 

^x to-ling the staxjc Gfire 3tcry. The court said: "The dam^.ges 
I Bought are for the same injury allagea to have reaultea frorii 
the defectiveiiess or insuf riciericy of tii^f oane machinery 

nd 'hat the existence of such defects was by roason of the 
uofault of the defendant.* In Chicago City Railway Company v 
McMeen r>06 111. 103, one of 'he principal questions arose upoE 
demurrer to replications to pl^-eas of the statute of liwitations 
to an additionalcount "iled after the statute had run. The 
court said that it rr.ight "De true that the facts proved under 
tlie ar f^ndrient v/ere at variance ^'^ith the alle{:ationB of the 

original iocl-iration, and still it did not noceosarily foJlow 
tliat the alle/ations of the a.;:Ojidment introduced an entirely 

new and distinct cause of action. This was illustrated in 
various ways, and the court held that although the arriendrnont 
varied tho ietails in several respects, yet so long as the 
identity of the natter upon '.'rhich the action v/as founded was 



9di noiJ. •iofsaslnl ^(I'r.l.e'^ ai: :^o«■i iisiTeJuffi aif* a . inovoic. 

■' to ©^JTreecfiS ©rit- 'io- esusoecT fe«FjJ-»e-t«rjs ©cf ton lltfi J-neoiafci/t srf' 

,059 .1X1 SSS ,8CiX&riq Y treXIexM .»V9 .1^ X*^ ",X^of^8 V oiix/off»t) 

iOijLbiBy x&its aesiT*'; -^XXjSireij e^rf MOtiBeitp &lifj^ ©XirlW 
aoi:«t!:r>X^©fo ©rfif fjstfct «&«?© i; ifitoja-a ixl' bxBS neecf ■^f£lBs/8i/ feiirf *!: - 

.oO XlfM ^iiillon 03«olif^' itftTbJf" fff^'' .¥>ft'V% '^•s^tft^'^fl enroled' e'ebix. 

efeoOT sexf^on* ^lOTisfli iwsw tuif' ,*Ga ssw #Jt tMt fcl^rf- 8£^ *I .Jni/o; 

010X1 b&tlu&Bt svjBrf 0* begoXXB Ijiig'tfli #iH£8 sri* toi q^js 3-il3Wo: 
f<t&Kljl»Bm ©1BJ38 f>ii3- lo Y®'^***'*'^^"'®^^ ''^^' eae/'rp-n't+oele^ :" 

If XtmqmoO y;s^Il^n i(tMD ;orgBt^J^#K* nl •;*frjE!lNtf»t©h"'»rf:f 10 HUbIbI 
moqu ©ao'iB anoJE*s«st/p Ifiqiori .XXI 90S neoTToW 

miT .fwrc fcBff e^fltiStfe erfd T9tl^^ fettXl't ^rfwooXjsnoltlbbJB ire' or! 
leljm* f)evo«q e*-o«!t' erf^ indi »utJ ocf :^rfgl:m *1 ^jbxI* bies iiuo. 

woXXo" Yii'2f'E<£0ORn **tt i?i^ tf XXilc forr« jKolrf-BTrXoefo Xi^trlg/lo 

ak t>&iBi^3iisl£t e«w eliW .«olfi&B ^o BUtssst ^Ofti^aib bni? wen 
^£o(.?jjfi= , I'u'otliXjB *j>iri«f Moii 3^ut>6 ©/(■;+ 

;.prc©v»B Hi eXlAcfei Offi*^ l»©la.Bv 



preserved, it lid not ntato a new cause of action » The couri; 
there quoted v;ith a^oproval from Alabama Br^aat Bouthem Ry« 
Co. V Thorac, 89 A.la. C94 as rollovvB: 

"Tho various arendrents allowed ^.o the comijlaint io not, in 
our o;)inion, introduce i new cause of action di'Terer.t rrom 
that stated in the original count of the complaint. The 
gravamen of tho action, io f\T\ injury caused to twelve head of 
cattle shipped toy the plaintiff on the defendant's railroad 
on April 29, H286, ^hich injur>- wao alleged to toe the result 
of the defendant '3 nc-^lifonce. Tho several ai'iendcicnts each 
make a case based on 3oi;:e allsf-ed violation of duty £rov.-in£^ 
ou^ of the undertaking to ohip ther.e tiane cattle. They r;;ay 
corc-ect a misdescription of ^rio contract ao to the agreed 
point of deetin^.tion of the cattle, or otherwise cure an 
imperfect statement of the same subject Biatter, or add new 

vermentB of facts more clearly zhcirini^ the negligence com- 
plained of or other.Yip:e altering the grounda cf r.5Covory, or 
varyin{>. the a3.1ofed mode in --hich the defendant has viclited 
his duties growing out cf tiie a^reer^nt embraced in tie bill 
of lading; tout t-hey ro no fartlicr. The i-.ontity of the matter 
upon v,'hich the si; it is founded i-3 fully iDre-served, The ai.end- 
ments all fall ■:7ithin the lis pondans proper, -nd only bud- 
eerve the purpose of accomplishing substantial jiv.itice between 
the parties and of docidinc the ponalne controversy on its real 
and tn^e merits. This is the main design of all statutes alxcv.-- 
ing aMendraents to pleadings. The Statute of liimitations of 
one y:'?ar ?7a3 for these reason?, no nu^ricient answer to the nevf 
Counts aided to "rho complaint by rray of ar:.endmont. " 
In L, R. & M. "R. Py.ro. V Fnright, ^37 III. 405, the tri-.l court 
suBtained a .demurrer to "he original aeclaration, and to the 
same dociaration as amended, ana held it ail not atate a cause 



^iii&i$X:&Ait ©tf o3- l)a§©XIi3 tiBV x^islai rfo-Jtffw t988I. »es lixqA no 
,. Y&«flt^^ »»£* *jbs>' smsi^ .^asitit nqti;^* o^ jisijf f^^T oforrn ©rf;?- l-o ti;o 

IK? tX^,©V0se%- -lo i»iritj3;^.T:3., ©left 3tii'T, :Ato :io lo JbonlBltf 

-il)n»aus ©rilT .Jo^jyx^e&iq jfrsfol «i iiif@ erf* riolrisEiioqi.- 

-woX>t« aoid'jyt^'iJ'e IXvBJ3ra, joslaoli J3feis««B^ »<l:t at elri? .ccfiTerrr ejrr^f iwi. 

1WK ttAt Ow, ■se^ariJA^ *n(»i:oi'^"^wfi oil- ;Sfiida«©T oa©rt;+ "ro?: e/jw t:bov «fto 
♦ t: i. vr ^ ♦*f5««Ujifi;0tfi* lo ^e« Ytf '^ftlja/fpaoo .f©ri.:^ ot JbeWvB ctrurop 

*rinti©X> ii fcf>nlr.*au« 



: '■ action, Another an-onded declaration vras filed after 'jhe 
t'ltuto had run. To this the lefeniant pleaded the {^eneral 
sue And the Statute of Limitations. The court sustained a 
•i.iurrer to the Btatt ito of Limitations, Thiii ruling was b-i'oro 
_ir! cause v/ae tried by '■/lo jury, and so was b-ifore veraj.ct, 
T-\c court held that e\»en though the visclaration bls .first amended 
• tato i a cause of action ^O-ectively, yet it etated a £ood 
uiuse of action and vrould have baen good aft or ver'^ictj and 
': at the Bocond ar.ionded deolaration did not introduce a ne'^r 
.use of action, but re-stated niore perfectly tho eaiiio cauce of 
•'tion stated in '"he first arconded ieciaration, .and T^hat thougii 
-0 facta concerning the duty of the dofenaant were, perhaps, 
jLii.jerfectly averred in said first ai.ionded declaration, yet 
•- :cy vvoro but a defective statement of a Gau-3e of action and 
ouid have haon t,ood after verdict, and ^:herefo^e the court 
•oporly sustained the demurrer to -he plea of the Statute «f 
unit r-tione. In Hagan v Sohleuter r.36 ill. 467, one of the 
aentions diacuaned aroee upon ;ho ruling of the court in r-u3~ 
lining a denurrer to a plea of ^he Statute of Limi tat ions to 
.a amended ieclaration filed after the statute hau run. This 
ulir.f^ was, therefore, uefore verdict, Tue original .'.eclara- 
Lcn averred the unsafe construction cf a certain -.vail but 
.ia not state in what respect it \"ii.& unsafe. The anenaed aeo«= 
•■'.ration specified ^iio articulars in .-hich it '/^as unsafe 
.ad oet out in full a contract which v/as only refarred to in 
:o original aeclaration, ani contained averments as to the 
..lations of ""he parties which had boen omitted irom tl.o ori- 
ginal declaration. It was held tliat the last ar.iendoa declara- 
tion iid iiot «tate a new cause of action, and that tne court 
:i 1 not err in ^-.u^taining a deraurrer to the plea of the St-. t~ 
uto of Linitations. Vogrin v Arr.arican Steel & ^ire Co. 26- 111, 



£ bealMaua tlts&t} ®iT iaaoifjBtJtaJtJ to oiTxrJBd'g erft hrrr ©weal 

fceijnsfiUJ taiil i>m noi*JB5tJSs£#»|) ©riS- itauoxl^ a®*© tadt feXerf -*sifO05©xJI 

; . .; i 4- J: i.^ '1 9Y'-v ite^taS' ^0^S 1 •'iKiB&«l'^#fr»il.i:^Xa^^ |i)ii|t?:«eeKl:#t)«r ;: It Q»» nmm^ 
wan £ ©Oi/coicixi Jon bit aoi^MX^i^uiit: fe*lMi©£!t««- fecopea eM.-lJ54# 

tmlci s. ai •xi»attxfci&i.-' f;. sciaiM 

»iii o:t &B ©Jhsemnevi? JbeciciBteo ,aoitJsiii.£o«b;ijwjisJ:gco^,f»*{:' 

-BXal9eb b9lsmnm taj^ J I »noiY£X«Xs>»t' X<inJ:s 

*iuww> -i»rf* tJMB[#, i;.: '9X1 £>. BtitB jiod l»li,.nai* 

nujai&Jb, ja :^nlakM&puH al Tt9 !^oti' M^ 



474, is ^ recent a:pplication of similar principles r/hore ';here 
Ynxb no verdict, T^^e re the court foimd in the language of the 
original deolaratlon words which hy referonco wore held to 
svifficiently Vdmit of proof on the trial that at the tino and 
place cf the irviury appellant was in the discharge cf his duuies 
as an employe of vthe a^-ipellee, although the charge wao not niade 
in language usually, employed in co-n'on law pleadings for that 
purpose. It was ^held that the fact?? so found in the original 
declaration by implication and by reference, though nob oet 
out v/ith the same paittylcularity 'hat they wore in tMo ar.ondod 

\ declaration, authorized the filing of said fimended declaration, 
and that the latter in no mannor changed the ; round on --hich 
a;ipellant had originally x^^e'^cated his cause of action. It 
chorofore oeonis to be an established rule of pleading that 
though the question whether tJie cauog of action stated in an 
i-.niended declaration filed after tlje statute has run is the 
^ raao cauoe of action as is -tated in the original declaration 
ur;u--illy arises after verdict, and it is usually said that tha 
declaration is good after verdict; yet, where there has been 
no demurrer to the declaration -.nd -he qubetion arises upon 
he pleadingo before verdict, an amended declaration cr an 
additional count filed after the statute has^, run will be 
held to only restate a good cause of action def^tively stated 
in the original decla^-^ation, if ihe necessary allf^rations 
may be fairly and reasonably inferred or may reascniibly be 
found to be implie^l in 'vhat is said in the criginaly declar- 
at Ion, 
. The original declaration i n - the - c.ia o at ba r sufficiently 
' alleged the location of this building in the City of Stroatorj 

■^ that tt had a ^stairway on the outside; that ff^rp&He»» ov/ned the 

I building at the time of th«9 injury; that the stairway was 
/ 



9di ''f&^ •ajBWSHi?^! «rff-^*ft Bftiroi *rtuoo ©iff •le-'lT ,*oii>tov jrs ajsir 

/ 
/ 



(defective, rotten andtngafe] that .ft-'rrre+irsrrtr fell through it 



t^ '- i<. Wt-<^,^ v«jX 



and was injured,* "ind that a pp o lloo had mads a contract v/ith 

/W^L^-J^y,^ y\ — j 

:iie hu??band of a \^pG - l - la » ^^ - to keep it in repair. It is argued 

that the oi^iF.inal dec lar>vt ion/did not even defectin^ely state 



\ 




I;a good cause o 
'?a'hich niaie it a dv^ 
Btainvay in repai^j^ 
.'had an^' right to bo upon 



urt f ac ts 

keep the 
gifio'A' that appellant 
iie v/as injured. 



[7. 



The second count of the original declaration allowed that on or 
, -a^»j»i4rae entered into an a 
a- ppollant ^ 



about May 33, 1910 

Samuel Jacobs on, ■^■e husband o 



agreement with 
to keep the r: of , 



Btairway and outer r/alls of said building in good reiiair and 
condition. T/.at count did not say in express terms a that this 
af-reeraent v/as in writing, but it said that a certain natter 
therein was "in 'vords and fi^uros as To Hows "^ whi oh plainly 
JEnaJj^eS- ttwi xi ^au ho'Pa 'vi3rBaT~'But''-g--yr-rt^gn~ agrs erre 

t Ci •' ' ili4 ol t —% - hQ- > .pIfia dn t. jiaXfi Jxad « At -^n& pl^f>e-— ^fe4%a*~«rrcrr^tr-«4^a- 

yJlirefl — ^T+rart" the patU" quQ^eS ?HeFei n~f rom'''"'''"l7h-^^ - - 

'-dft^~-.antJL::.e---a-g-?d«raent--i btrt— it- i-« -fai^'l-y'-irtfeTrsnT^si^^ 
T^a3--no-t--ths' Entire- a.erQOBienf j'dbeewA&e tin^ftLcount avord^ that 
T^M/^Mbrv. *^ij« litre und(*rtcok to k^t^ep sail stairvray in £ood 
repair and condition until June 15, 1915-, v'hich a^ not contained 
in ■vhat ic quoted Trom the ".croeraent.l Said sybcond count, there- 
fore, alleges an a^reoKent between aipolleo /and the husband of 
appellant to keep the stairwayvin good repair .and cor.dition, and 
that said agreement was in forca\at tl:e tair.e she was injured, aiSd 
it plainly indicates that -he af.reWenty ±x xxitiag was in writing 
and that only a part thereof ?'as set )^ut in that count. Te acre of 
the cpinion that an amended declarat^jion\or an additional count, 
stating more fully the nature of j^aid agreement, ^^.vsl explaining 
morn fully vhy appellant was on said stairvrayV vrould not be the 
stating of a new cause of action, but would be stating what 



a^a«&i ^M *#B Ao&. Jilb, . t^^asiiK^' 



b9u^^& «i .il *%Jmq^x. ISi ,?,,!: c; 












: ^Jjci/ ) .I(j{,rfoJt - iEtw ,,;y''g\y9XXol, aje. fc 



•jn£.£iB 



;9a erfT 



«] 



"'.oiimTLfc 



-e«^bfc[ 



vJii^*>ȣ^ 



astjBOlhni \lr.l 



)fli 3nJt*x;*8 



i-)tn 



might be reasonably inferred from what waa alleged in caid. 
second count. 

It would not be implied that an extoric^r stairway was 

put on as an ornamon\ to the building, but rasher tiiat it wag 
t]i0re for use and forXthe uao of appro i lant *s /husband • and to 

enable porsons vlio had\the right to do so yco pass botwoen an 

upper ytory and the f^treeV, It '-ould be py-^sucied that appellant '.s 

husband had an object in reciiiiring that /the Gtair.vay should be 

\ / 

kept in good repair, and thar\it was/ intended by the contract 

\ / 

that he should u ss it in sorr.e v.'ayconnected Tvith his home or 

his business. With exceptions not Xppli*^'^^"-^ here, a ivife has 

tr.0 natural right to go v.'here Jor/'nuaTlsi^nd lawfully is. A scr;e- 

what analogous principle 1::- staited in ^bbit v Rabbit, 69 111, 

277, and Kennedy v Kennedy, 87 111. 259. \To stato the occasion of 

her heinrr, on the ';talrv,'ay racro fully v/ould is^ly be onlar^iinp; the 

partioul?..ra of that ?/hich Is fairly infsrable froni said second 



count and fairly implied therein. The additior.al count set out 

Saia in.'Jtrument in full, ("fr -ir . -'^r; -'rTini -l - , ;i^ hn -inimriri^nfi i-;A(n"lnr:7.J T-i-nn- 

i fi P -'',grir\ V S fr ^l '^iftTfT, "iXiprfa . ) and it t.herefora appeared that 



e agreement r.entioned in the second count was a v/ritten lease 




used only as a store building and a flat for living rooiriB, am 
ti\at n. - ; ' \Vjllj6 v/as to so ro-rnodel the building that the upper 
flcor should have suitable apartments for flat pur -oses. T^^g 
.roof was that the upper stoi'y was so re-ncislod, and that at 



the tir.e of ths accident t 



o a^jpe^ Jumx, Sarauol Jaoooson ana hitf 



family lived in the uppar rooms, and that this stairway v/ as 
their irieans c" access tc the street, and that '^i ^pjllan'c lived 

here ith her husband, and that she was passing betv/ean the 
street and their livinr rooms when this board of the ^tair 
way gavo way bsneath her and caused the injury^J The ^additional 
ci3\inir^eclaxs^_,^"cr \he jHtRre injury to the appollfttit' , yrooeived 
upon the same otairwayNif the sane building, by re^^onVf the saae 
defect, and onl/^^T^plifiec^sand enlarges that vvlaich is fiA^rly 
/ 



iisc ni i)e^f^Ii£ si^v^ tjniv; moil ijerre'lni A^Icf/jnoasmr etf id^Jas 

,ia.uoo baooBB 



S^B 1*5' 






" '*10 or"-- • ■••■ " ■ ■■■' ^'" 



~ ■■ -©(Sloe A "'.■«!' t-flvv. 

16 rife^^^'ODO' 9ll^' ©tff!:^ 



o iU' Hi. i'o iuz 



•c'r.no 

r* ■ f rf I 






%^-r 



AiT . . 






^^.5S/;X'5 L' f ■"" t' -li/C 



10 

to be inferred from what is oaid in the second count. We are of 
opinion that thecso were pormissible enlargements an..* fuller 
Gtatonents of that which was im-periQctly alleged in the second 
count, and that the Statute ci Limitations v/as not a defense 
thereto, 

A ppellee however contondo that if naid stairway was out 
of repair, it was only a breach of a covenant in the ieaoe, '^nd 
'■^lat the only action to "/hich ho -vould be liable would be in 
v;ovenant for a brea.ch thereof, and therefore no cause of action 
i':', ctated even in "tho additional count. Whatever may be the jrale 
in c-hor jurisdictions, ivo think it clear from Sunasack v Morsy 
196 111. 369, and Porgcard v Hale, 305 111. 511, that in this 
state, if a landlord has covenanted to keep the premises in 
repair, or has known and corcealed dcfocts therein from the 
tenant, and becauee of a failure to keep the premises in repair 
or bocaui?.e of tlio defects so concealed, either the tenant cr 
aatjc any member of his family is injured, or any other person 
lawfully upon aaid premises for busineos or pleasure lii injured, 
Buch person would be entitled to recover arainst the lanalcrd 
for said injuries in an action on tlie case. In Bor£(^ard v 
G.le, supra, 'A\e wife of the tenant was the plaintiff, and though 
she failed to recover, it was only becauoe of the inauf ficioncy 
of the evidence* 

To therefore conclude that the court erred in overruling the 
demurrer to the plea cf the Statute of Limitations to the addi- 
tional count, and erred in refusing to admit the lease in evidence, 
ana erred in directing a verdict for apjiellee. The judgment is 
therefore revers-fed and the cause remanded for further ^proceedings 
in conformity with this opinion. 

Rjsxxax': Reversed and romanced. 



iJKOoee erf* ni .besoIXjs ^id-oeti? ad-nomfti'jB;^ 

iiso arv.' -^BwiiB^ta blBs "li t|irf:f eJfcj«0*aoo 5«v©worr SQlisiiri A 



at ®d hLuow ©IcfBil «</ fcXwov,' ©r: 
aoiio^ 1o esuBo on sio'jfeo^srf^ briB ,loo't«riJ xfaj 
eXtrx Oil;t 9cf ^Bxn i^veitfiifW .tmioa XjBr:, 
X®^oM V io&asauB moil xr 

©ijif mail . aJtB%9fit ^^O'Gttpb 
ttixi^x ai u&sitaG%q, 8^^ %eeA oi iwcffXi. 

Jnjsne.* ©ri* T;e^i6 ,JbolB-&3>rtoo oa ado©'tej 

nosieq i:©ii<fo ^fnjs ito ^ije^x/tni ai ^XimBl at A lo "locfr, 
tX)6ajJini^i eiwBBsXq %o eeenxaud lol eosirn- 



ttilBqei 
nev© l>o*£c 

.XII aex 



BBUBOi 



,^«» 



exW 3ni:XjjT:iovo ni ^e-; 

,©onei3XV©. irx ©aBsX fdt^ it|u6« o^ 
ei J^reciaijuj, srfT ,.©©J. 
ssnXiyeeooia i8rii"s:j/j 



ruco 



ow aoBiec Aon. 
-ulnt 

.xsvooo'x oi lioXiBl ede 
.©onoiDivo ©ri:* lo 

iseXq ©. leTiJjme; 

:xoti 

lir.tioBi'i js 

11 ■ Y^lraiotnoo nX 



.jyein 



XAXJCKR 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) _ 

SECOND DISTRICT. I ^''' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in m>^ office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and aflBx the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord i3ne 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerh of the Appellate Court. 



.,..,,, ■:: .,r;j ■]■■ •,Mr,.y ,f ',,.i- 
ii, ■{> .'..rri, ,, ••■ell ;■■ ^ ' 



. (inr.-'vji'irr' 1 



::i(l,t . 



r i 



1.V P-^ 



/ / / 

AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE C^tlRT , 

i 
Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, thQ^"" fifth day of October, 

in the year of cur Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 

within and for the Second District/of the State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Ptesiding- Justice. 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice. 

Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justice 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff 



V Justice. >^*k 

, Cler.:3 I. A. 100 



\ 



^ /(/-^^-W^-^'T^/^/f// 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

L;:l - '• ■' the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 






no : J j w- J f 8b7>r<v>:9 ,1 1£ .; £,.-[ t , r 
:. : D-oIfi aiiw-JTUoO 9.ctt lo .to in. -.jo erf J 



Gen, No, 6143. 

d 
James B, Padatn, 

Defendant in error. 
V8 Error to LaSalle. 

The Ohioago, Rock Island and 
Pacifio Railway Company, 

Plaintiff in error. 

JsuB»fl-^.,_Pa d e n, p laintiff l .i 8l &», was a tsaraster, <7.-<-^ "^ 

A 
unloading coal frow a car that had been placed on a aide track 

by the Ch^5ag07'"TroGlc'--i8l6^«4- A Pao ifi ^-Rai-lwjty— g&mpaay:^. th^ de- 
fendant J3«ik«w, and while ao engaged a gwitohing orev/ of the 
defendant shoved another car against the one from which the 
plaintiff was taking coal with euch force as to throw him to 
the ground and injure him^Thls nxi^ was brought to recover 
for gdsh imjury. A jury trialyXXfulted in a judgnasnt for 
#ilOO,0^'ii?Qm 'vhlch this wri'^ of error is prosecuted. 

It isNcont ended that the declaration does net even 
defectively atat©\a cause of acin.on and that defendant's motion 
In arrest of judgment 3hould/n?ve been sustained, "ttiifl is 
the principal question iVi. tfte case, the contention beinr that 
it does not appear that jpl^.ntiff was rightfulV at tiie place 
|Where he received his iiijury, a^ therefore the defendant OTf-ecl 
hiffi no duty except no if to ••vilfulljK.iiij^irs him» /The declaration 
B O fag a s- it folates t e 1)> i lo iju e stl an, chargeti^ that the de- 
fendant in the use and operation of its railroad had a team or 
merchandise track connected with it? road in the Villa£S of 
DePue, in the County of LaSalle, which track was used by the 
■ defendant in placing care thereon containin3; freight, so that 
parties entitled thereto mig't be enabled to unload gaid freight 
from said cars, or loaui freight into the cars; that on January / 



r 



^nmbB^. ,3. aemfiL 
.toTT9 nJt tajRbnetftd 

bne bnzlal a(oofl ^oaBolrtO »rfT 
^Y^^'BfT'HOO ^AWll-sH oJtlioa'? 

iOBi* ©bia £ no heop.Iq xtsscf b*rf teiit ibo £ »oa^ X«oo gnlfcAoXnir 

edd- lo ivsio gnlrfoitJcwB js bsgis^n© oe sXlifw bciB ^wtftmti. tciBbaet 

edi- rfolrfw saort eno sri;f teftijB^-s "^ao redSonP' bevorfe JnBfiflelteb 

o* ralri wotcrfc^ od- a^ eoTo"?- rfojirp rftiw Xjsoo gnljCxJ b^w 'ili*nlfiXq 

asvooei Oo d-rigx/OTcf sjbw Hire Bl/fTi .rnlrf (^itulni bna brrx/OTs ©riJ 

lot tnssvgbul e at bBtluB&^L&iif vii-^ A .Y^irfxri dsrue lo!: 

.b9titoe»orq Bi lor^fi ^o ft-xw alrit rfoxrfv fflp«tlN^O.O0XXt 

fteve ton eeob rtoitBifsXoalb 9rf+ i'Bii;;t hebne^noo/'ai tl 

ffol*om g'tnBbns^tab if^rft ftnji noi*oc Ito sair^o M/^&ntB yXevii-osleb 

8i ^JtriT ,b©nlj8tax/fi nsscf ©vsn\hXi;orf8 iiiemgb^t lo taeiTB aJt 

^firft 3ni6cr noitnetnoo 9n;t ^eeso e?l^ Xi noi:*«©up XaqlorrXaq erii' 

•oaXq 9d^ tB if li/li-riglT 8«w Itxd-nl^cV tjsrf^t ajBeqqa d-oa aeob *! 

59<i»o iaebae'ieb srit stolsisrid- b^ ^Y'^u'tJitX axxf bevieosa sri eierfwj 

floitjBiJBXos^ ©rfT \ ,mirf soxrtiil/yXljtr^Xjfcw ot Von *q«ox© >c*i;b Ofl mid 

HBb ©riJ' tjB^^J- JiesiBr^o tC^l a e u p a-^ fe -rf ^ ■» » - te< » « Xei itX a i ) lol o b 

10 mjseJ £ b«ff bjBOiIijBi B#l "io nox;tjarteqo bns ©bjj ©it fi^ ;fn«bnel 

lo 82£XI1V srlj- ni beon 9^-1 rf*J:w b^toennoo jfoei^f esibnailoasra 

erfJ' ycf beei/ bbw 3ro£7;f rfojtrfw jSXIbBjkJ "io Y^nuoO ©rli- sxt ^BU^eQ 

tsrlt OP ^^rigJ:©!^ cnXfltjecfnoo cioeasrf;f btjbo gniojBXq aX J-ricbneleb 

*r[s£9Tt fcxBP bJBoXrtif o^ beX<lisn«> erf j-:^glm o*9T:9rf;f belJ-X^frr© esitiaq 

/_ . .. 



1^ 



12, 1914, the plaintiff was encaged in \inloading certain 
freight frcffl one of the cars 30 used and operated by the 
defendant while said car was standing upon the said merchaiidise 
track. 

Then follows allegations that the defendant, without 
warning etc, drove another e4r, etc, 1 

It ifl said that the declaration mig.t be true, and yet 
the plaintiff might be a trespasser. This is true, and the 
('eclaration would probably; for that reason, have been held 
bad on (demurrer. But the question here is whsther it is good 
after verdict. A similar declaration was before the court in 
Seibert v Vandalia R, Co. 179 111. App« 617» ard the "=ane con- 
tention there denied. There was an averment in the declaration 
in that cfese that the plaintiff tias engaged in unloading freight 
from the car into the wagon, a.nd h'^d been so engaged all the 
day before the injury complained of and on the day of the in- 
jury up to two o'clock in th.6 afternoon. Those averments left 
th=-; declaration leas open j5o attack than is the declaration in 
the instant case, V7hich contain no allegation as to the length 
of tine the oar had been tiiere, or tV.e plaintiff had been at 
work there, and there is much force in the defendant's argument 
that the declaration, considered under the ru^es announced in 
Maokey v Northern Milling Co, 810 111, H5, andXMoAndrews v 
IC. L, S. & K. Ry. Co, 323 111. 338 does not even "^ef sotively 
'state a cause of action. Our attention Is also called to our 
own decision in Vogrin v American Steel & Wire Co, 1?9 111, 
"8^^' --346y-i»Ker-e we end-eBmrred' t<^' a?plT"*^'e' *'31^'''a'5*'^'>2n^ 



, mi' ' " . ' rs/'f/il, 
eBUjOjBxioasm 61b8 'SiiS aoqu -^Iba^ia asw :t5o btfia eliriw ^nshnaleh 

d-x/orf;fxw ^tasba9l9b erf* *Brf,f aaox^jRssXx^i^wolXol nsrfT 

'"^ . - ; -H'sLiaSi o/Zlxaa^ 

tBX bn£ je/j*i;f ©d J^ 'gim aoitsijuloeb adt ;|-jSiit bi«a al ^I 

sriJ- bn.'s ^ej:/"!* si exrfT .^teasisqasaJ' b 9cf d-riaJtar ^Ix^nLsIq srijf 

6X8 rf n©?cf avjsrf ^noajsfta *£ricf to'x ^yXcTjso'oaq bijjow noi^BifiXoaf) 

ioo3 eX i-i Tsrij-erfw »i s^erf floiJeiflxvp erfJ^ itx/S .le^taxme-) no l>Bcf 

«i tTx/oo pff* sTolscf 8i8W iJoi*£Tj8X©eh ajsXlarl* A ,toibX9r tet\B 

■■f.'-.£-^\ ■■'-.'■ ■-;/• rt i;--.i.ru - ; ■•• " ^r .vr-"" ;• •-■':5 

-noo 9r!£r -^ ,TX8 .qqA .XXI SVX ,oO ,H ailBbnaV v #a8cfJts8 

. i, ■ ' "' --'"■;/■■ ■ ^fj'^i'^:;. ^ '^ f ^ "' '^ i 

aoit£,isLoeb edt at tnamisv-e xxjs ajsw aierfT .fiecneft starft nolJne* 

*ri3l9il "^tbsolau at be-gB-gas bbP ^"ii&atBlq srf.t tBd& eaiBO *arI3- at 

arf* XXb 69SJB3jn9 oe aeacf bad tnr> ^ffog^w 9d& o&at imo acit aoai 

-«1 arfJ lo x«£> srf;t no bnjs/ i¥ benisXtiffloo ^lulai srfj- aaolacT x«^ 

tiel a^aeaiB'rs saorfT ,a.ooaxfi&ta M* aJt iooXo'o ow* dt^ qu X'tut 

al aoitaiBloeh ^rft bjc n«xf* iOBJ-j*Js OJ^ rteqo easX noXJ-saaXosi) arix 

si^'Sael srfd^ Oo Bjs aoXtageXXjs OQ aXs;tnoo rfoirfw ^»aBO *nBtani sdi- 

*J3 aescf l>,?5rf HjkJ-nJfBlq 9:ii xo te:t8xli- aaecf fc«rf ibo srf* amJti' lo 

. ,i,'/;: A'— .s ■'■•'■•=» ^i' -. ■■ v^.^ '■ '■ ,- *>ift7i« at 

Jflsffli/^as e ' JaBbnalrsfy an* al eoiol xfai/iu ai sisrfJ bn^ ^eieri* iiow 

• "/ ■ ; r v:;'-5.: .."x i or- i:iq erft 

al bsonuorinB as/x/i srl.^ Tsbnx; fc9l9£)lanoo tfloXJjsisXotb erf* >*d* 

&•" ' .-; ■/ - i-^ ♦■?■ - . . - '^^ ■■-'i aoofj *it 

V •waibnAoM /JbnB ,aXX ,1X1 0X8 .oO g^iiXXlM aierf^ioH ▼ ^H^^ 

XX9Vjt*09'i©i^-IWV9 toxi B9ob SZK .1X1 8SS .oO .^H .a 1 .8 .J .3; 

/' ' ^■^ V -.r .;'? r*.- Off airf 

ix/0 o* £)8XIjso oaXB aT noXd-jna^fd-a ixK) .aoitoa \q eax/ao a 8*a*8 
•XXI e?'X .00 e-xiW 4 Xae^e aaoxrcamA ▼ att^o^ at no^sxoeb awo 



""---■'t baAjA.'n* aaXtiaq 

■ /. 



V 



App. S4E, ".'hsre we o.rieavored to Kapply ""he rule arinounced 
in ho36 two casPb a-.G erred in tJie effort so to do, a? 
appears from the deoision of the sujjrorie court in C63 111* 
475. We are inclined to the opin-i n that "ho mle 
announced in the Mackey and McAndrewa cases Should not bs 
exte nied farther than is required by those decisions, and 
that it chould not be applied to this case. ?fe do not see 
how the lack of averment that tho plaintiff vn\s lawfully 
engaged in removing merchandise from the car can be held 
a more serious defect than would have been a failure to avar 
that he v;aa at the time in "-he exercise of due care for h^B 
own safety, o.nd the court held in B. & 0. S- W« Ry. Co . 

V Then 159 111. 536, the failure to aver due care was curoi 
by verdict, and used +h6 followir^, language:- "Where there 
is any defect , imperfection or omission in any pleading, 
whether in subt'tance or in form, which would ?iave been 
a fatal objectsion pn demurrer, yet if t\e i.^sue joined be 
such as necessarily required, on the trial, proof of :h3 
facts 80 imperfectly or defectively stated or omitted« 
and vrithout v.'hichit i^ not to be presunied that the judge 
T?<ould direct the jury to ^ive, or the ^d^cy '.vould have 
/riven, the verdict, such defect, imijerfection or oniiBoion ie 
curea by verdict. 1 Ohitty's Pleading (I4th, Am. ed. ) c76; 
Illinoia Central Railroad no. v Si::.nons , ad 111, ;54S; 
Atchison, Topeka and Smta Fe Railroad Co. v Feehan, 
149 id. 203, In the case at bar it is not to be presumed 
the jury would have p;iven the verdict, or that the court waU 
have sustained it, without evir.ence tending at least to es- 
tablish the fact of due care on the part of the deceas^^d. The 
"mention in arrest was projjerly overruled," 

Tho IllinoiB authorities on this ftubjeat are col- 
lected and reviewed in Jacobson v Rax-ney. Oen, Mo» 6076 



\J 



Qlin Off'" *Brid- n-- rnlqo erfit 0^+ be^lXoni: etrr- eW"''i^7* 

so Jois: l3lijoil« seaBO ewotcijnAsM fanB Y«ic/<W %rfd^ jctl -beoni/onnjB 

£>ni? ^enoisiooiD oaorft vcf foe-jija^t al' itBrf* ^eridrcjBl Iw&rWte 

60G ior. Ob 9W .ee-so airi;J- at £)9ilqc^-'«lt;f '"i}^c«f i>Xi;oric :ti tsAi 

YIIx/IwjbX a/i^w 'ilxi-nir^Iq ojI? 7BAi tctrniie^^ "id ih£l^ e'rf> Vt)rj(i 

hied qg" £t^o %i>» 6xij motel oaibnisifoicesft gnivowfet' ftf-' bfcr^e^e 

•3©vs oi' &i^li£ii ij n«eo ©v;:.j:I foiL'ow nnfit tt)^\Bi> ByoiTfee O'iotef'i&j 

aJt^I ttol ot:bo aift) 'io syiotcexo erfr ni effii* erfti" dB'''W#'brr'TOtf}i 

. oQ .^fi .W .8 .0 S> ,^ ax bleii -twoo erf^ brr."- ^x^elsa niro 

jtBiijo .sfiw.. ei£o sjt;0 ttsvB o;f eTxrIxBl &ci:i .669 .III €91 jn^riTV ; 

- '• I 

need" ,tT^^4 bluQ'^ xloxriw ,msot al to eonB^-iCf^a Ai ■terfJd^itw ; 

da^i/t aa'c" ij-js^d' ijefrmaeiq sot oi *oit al *irfoM^t t^o rf.^'fvf " fcffB^ ; 

ai ^xwieeiffio lo noiioelieqiai ^toe%eb rfoua , $"(i^' t)*r©V %ri#^ tiiOT^^ | 
jfi^ .<( .i.e .m* ..iJM) a[Tif;j5eX<i a'YtsriitO X . toib-tev x'ti *i^-Wb | 
i,a,tS^ •ii^^ 86 ,aK^irctia' v .oD i)jBonXi;Afi Xfl^JneC* frfoniXX-l" 
^eB£i»e1 V .oO l)jBoixJtfifl »'? Btati^ tHTB jBrf«(ibT <ho6x'ffc8"A 
ijeiTttreei^.. «G of "on ei ;)J: liBcf ^b o8b© ©if? rrl .S0&- .H^ ^^X 
l£xiw iiij<^ 4f*ite^*tit io »*oxMev erf* acvia •vr^rt fcldol^ y^ »i^*' 
HBO o* &a£,eJ. *i5 anxJ-jnet eoneiriJrve iuod^iv ^tl benl£*Ptfe evBri 
9^ .b'^BBBOQb eri.+ '±o i'ttBtj srie)- no etrxio 8ui> lo J-orl edi dsllilst 
•* .fceXiJiisvo YX^tsqoiq qbw JasiijB nx noxJbm* 
-Xoo 9ir. cfoeLcfwa axrfJ- no eelr'xioriuUB RlonXXII orfT 



-111. Appc . 



< 



WeXthink "-.ho ieclaration muet be held good STXtsr verdict . 

th0refor!?\ the court lid not srr in overruling the motion 

in arrest ol ju:ignient« y 

/ 

The <:,iet of the char.fje in the declaration of the 

defendant's ne£i'lg3nce is that it pushed the oar upon the 

\ 

one which the plaintiff was unloading '»;ithout £,ivin£ hire 

-varning, TThile there\ia sonc conflict in -^he evidence, it 

alDundantly 'Sustains t^e declaration in tha.t respect a id it 

is not gerioiialy contendked that it does not, Tiiare ia no 

\ 
oontontion, or ground fo?, contention, that the verdict is 

\ 
excessive if the jury were Warranted in "believing the 

piaintiff'a evidence as to the gztent of his injuries, axii 
v/e think "^ney wore ivarranted in '30 doii'i^;. No error is argued 
as to th3 rulings of the court on the admission of evidence. 
The only inetruction ^^iven at the instance of plaintiff was 
on the meanure of da:na£eg . The injv.rj^ clained waG an a££ra\a- 
tion of a hernia, frowwhich t3ie plaintiff 2iad been no;:,etii!B 
suffering, and ':here was evidence before the jury as to a sur- 
gical operation x-'orforitsd on plaintiff after the ti-e in 
'lueetion « - cl Wx a fair -^ uffptinn waf k-pr-egentFd-as • to how-wtrnh-o f 
the disability^jinder j^hdch plaintiff was suffering resulted—.,,. 



_f?om th e„a.cci"^nt. The instruction coinplainod of iviforrned 
the jury that if ti;.iy found the defendant f.uilty in 
assessing damages "they should take into consideration 
all the ^c"^s airl circvmietances shown by the evidence before 
themj the nature and extent of the plairtiff's physical 
injuries, if any, i?o far ae the same are alleged in the 
declaration and shown by the evidence," J It ic urged 
that under the evVience in this case which required discrin^- 

•i-nttiort by the jury\bet,vAgn the disability resulting from 
the accident and chargVi in the declaration, a\d disability 



♦^^ 



. ..^qA .III— -,. 

. JoJiJiev i9?ir« bD03 tlorf sd t3om rroitei-slosfc erf? Mfilrf^/eW; o:i 
rtottiMH ex';* grriljjite"70 ni it© ;}-orr fcit *tuoo ©rft 4*roleTerit 

arff noqjj- Tcso erf^ teiieuq tt tBf^t si ^erse^lla^sr e«tn£jfen«1«tr ^ 

d-.c 4©orrefcJtv& erf-*- rrl st^ifln-dp erK>e el yfe'reiffr ©Ilxflf-^^-grflirciSW':! 

on ci sierff .;|-o/i BBOb it tst'.^ fcetfcnetJ-noc Yl-8:fci:s«» -jfotr. ii 
ei toibrsv erf* tr.rl:- tnor;f/r©fcoo /^o*: i^uoT^ rto ,iTo-'";JTf<Jtfniao 
9rf"^aprxvej:Iecf ni £)fi*friJttTje7r eie-w Y'^^ij-i; Grit 11 ^evl^aorxxj 
.8ei'rui;nx sirf lo :frr©?re €^{^ or 8£ oorreiivs -%*li'>:trrxfi£q 
i>ei;2- oite o'^ .^nxol? 05'' iJx be&tirrrBT et^* -xbcI:^ "3tal/i±'?Bti[c 

.©oxre'DlTe ^o no i bb Imbs &Af no t'£uor> er!^ '?^ cgnxXflTr ^erf(t ot-es . 
8£W ilxJrrxijXq lo son^^tarri- snct *b nsyj:3 noitmn.tst:l -^lao sxfP. I 

«Hirf'en!03 need" bed "ilitr.iBlq, Bdi rfoiriwTSoi^ \Bl:mB{f r to coi.t 



J 



nx '#rri* erff aott^;: l^ttrrifilq no ^«mtrci''!:i©ci /soiJJ'Brrs^o IrcJta 
^ o-rftr::?ra -"fToif ■■0T^^"SF■•■b^tm>s©•Iq--8*w-xwxl^a£^/p-4^^ ■4floi::^e9^;p 

£.ei^Ixja©i aiiiTsl^xjB sjsw llifcxjBlq jSoxri^ ^efacri; Y!^iIJ:tfB«xiTt^«rf* 
tednoT^rrl Yo b6r.lnle!moo rtoif^sj-'cBri erf? .tr^eBlesB e4«^ m^^ 

aotiBisbt^nor) otrri 9^5;:^ fclyorfr ■'jeri:t" Begi^mtxfc 3Giaeeeafe.K 
9'ioterf eccsMfs exit y^' «'*offa »eofr«;i-p«n-W5Ti'© trris aj-$ja ©iCJ- lifeT 
XfiOlSYr&i 8*1:'iti''l/;Iq erf* ^o thrreti© bftr.* ••h/^wt •nv iCierirf 
Bcit nl ZjogeilB eitJB ©frt.6e erf-* e/- tbI o« :«"^x?jb ^1 ^aeliij'ini 



b9%its ot ifl |^".»or:cMve ©rft+ Y«f nworfs iifris rtoWiiXiilLtJAir 



HBlioexl; beali/pe^ rlolrfw ©fe.*D 8lrf* rrl eooeirfv© fkff* tatiCix *>sitta" 



< 



< 



that did not result fitom the accident, it .is likely that the 

jury ware misled and aV:ed on the bolfef that danages 

could "oe asgosgsd for the\diaabil±ty/'reC''^rdle3s of its source 

We do not understand counsel to contend that the instruction 

\ 
would be bad except upon^hi8 peculiar condition of therocord. 

It is true that in cases ■'/h3r9'\the plaintiff is suffering 

disability that nay have arisenXonly in part from the 

\ 
injury coiuioliined of, instructionsx as to the measure of dam- 
ages that might otherv/ise be {{ood elt<>uld bo carefully ^-uardad 
and the jury clearly /nformed that dai^-ages can only ba 

baaed on "rhe injury/coniiilained of. ThisXiriSt ruction referred 

/ \ 

the jv.ry to the 'declaration and limited tl'^ injuries to 

tho aa^ j- ^Q -'Q- c harg.ad.y--a43(l''The court, at the instance of "he 
defendant, 5r«i?y-~&IaaxJ4i— aaci — siw^eii^ljt. instructed the jury 
tl-at the damages must be confined to such a3 -tHP©- the n'turai 
proximate result of i:ho defendant's nefrlectj that the burden 
of proof was on the plaintiff to shovr hia injuries vrere^^,^ 
caused !;:>■/ the defendant's neglect J and if they believed 
that the injuries ;from xrhich plaintiff ccinplained resulted 
from other onuses tha.n the defendant's csgiaat: negligence 
tliat the complainant could not recovor anythin.;: for injuries 
and ajjec ifically told ^her.a if ^hoj found rron the evi lence 
that ^he condition of the plaintiff's rupture v^hich nec- 
e,--,sitated the jcperation. he underwent did net result fi*om the 
accident of which he coinplains as a nattiral and proijcirate 
corisequence, but wa::; a conaiticn in no 'vay co.mected there- 
with, tlien in determining vrhat his damages were they should 
leave out o.'' conoiaeration the fact of the operation, the 
time lost thereby, and "-he expense paid and suffering con«=» 
nected there^vith.l Fo thinxNthat /iie instruction was one that 
could be prcperly fivon in cr\inary cases, but -^liat it needed 
lualifying under *■ e facts i^. th\s case, -r..d ^hat t".e other 
instructions before renticJ'ned fullX served that purpose. 



\ 

9cii ^j:Ai Yieill 9\ti ^t^Qhi.oo£ blU aiodl iluBBr ton bib isdi 

segrmcfc tm{t lellod erf:^ no bett-^'^-fetxit* £>©iai:ai.6i©w v-iui 

©o^jL/oa r;*! lo aeeX£)'r<55©'tvt#4iieF«6ii)/>il*'i:ol beBseeSf eo' Muoo 

noit9u%&aai edt -tad^ bnethp^e^ StdBRcoo bttB^Bzebnu ioa ob eW 

.bioooi8n\t "^o noJt*itinoo rs:«lIxJo©cr eiric'nociaf *qeore b£tf ©of JbIa6W 

axxlielli/a ex ttk$niBLq ©ii^/©:reriw 'eeei'S itJt *Bff? ii/Td' el *I 

-flijBl) lo ©tEXf3£9ifl ©rist o*-fB;,^aol;ta«fT^»KJt ,1© i^eniflciffloa yistoi 

n©i3T0Cf..«Kl:+ *Bn'* ;«)ro©Xjien s» SruBfcrca^eJb ©rf:!- ^:(5 WjtraeT: ©tx>nrix(«<I 

s,t.^^^!Eew aex^u^fii Bid Vfoiia of "^lii^ni/jXcs ©rfit no B£W ioort<j. lb i 

fe©ifXi/e©x feenxjsX'proo l^itf^ifiXq iftdiSw-atQ'S'? eelijc/tni 9Jlt^ -.tidrfc}- 
©on©3iXs9n jfaiaigsia a*^fi£J&.C£©^£J ■'©/Id'- rtF.xict- ssawBO .tttiitcF'flioi^ 

©onartve ©rf* fflotl .bnno"? Y®^^ ^x iaajl.+ MoT^ Tf^l«3tl^j:o©it« i>^i". 

erf^l gtqrl j}-Xx/e©r£ ton Mi; itnew-cetoj:; 9:i .nQi*Js,i!©qd|.«rf* bet^tk^iSfB 

©jBHiao-x^ £inj8 Xfsij-jd-^jn b 3iJ fini^Xqsioo erf fIoi:/f\? Iro toojfcjraojs 

-©T©i-iif -jb©'j-oonnoo yb^ on nl rtol'ikbtmo b t^iRW-tijtfi.YBOirairpeQnos 

bliSQ:is ^ocii pie-^ 'B9^Bsu-b aid tijrlw anlnii^raet*/? ni jieitu*^ ^rCitl^ 

Qdi tnoi^Ba©qt> .©rf* to tor-l erl* rnoirf-Bieciaftoa; 'to d-rro ©vriel 

-noo snlie^'t^re /j»£tB Misq ©ansqx© ©ji^ bnx. »,Yd©T*it; 4-fioX: js^iiit 

terf* ©no ©fiw noi:#oi/T*ani ©rfit, tf-flriA/inXrfd' sW Lrfd-ivveTeitr l)©to©n 

Z»»l»©a *i J'itfit ;fi/cf 4e©ej30 yt:^-^^^o ni novi::^ \'lT©q . 'fjcq sd :bXxroo 

T©i{;*o ©^f^i. ■ ^j©rf;t fo(T.c 4©er.o ei«;+ rti bj-obI ?L:-f;t. teXmif sniTflliin^ 



> 



> 



The sixe of ^:he veriict indicates that the jury wore not 
minled in that respact. Finding no error in the .record 
the judgment is affirmed. 

Affirmed. 



a , tfr8^.-^^.'? erft Tciil .tltresi ton bl ^ 
ton eTi^'ft xxsj1^9sU tstii ee*£oifenl iQlbter tdt-.to exie ©riT 
fcToo^i. erf* i!ii- toiae orr snitnil .#oeqe©» *«rit^ ni; bBletm 



stJ ' 



,;:JhflXXi- 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) _. 

SECOND DISTRICT. l' '^''' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

C^urt, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this . 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



» v< 



'd ; ;(• "/I !•.).( 






AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COU^, ""■■"•:*-/ 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of thef State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presiding- Justice. 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice.! 

j 

Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justice. 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. ^ 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. | 



U 



(/- A 



f^V--.. 




/ 






BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

DEC 2 7 I9lb the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ures 
following, to-wit: 



« nr' 






\ 



no :^nv-oj ,8b'r;r 
Irl 2.6W JiuoO erii- lo n- 



Gen. No. 6t31, 

Joseph H» Paxton, at al. appellees 

V8 Appeal from Lake« 

William H. Fabry, et al appellantfleS 

Games, J^ - ^^^^'<^^ 

Soraetime prior to August 1914, appailaat. Bradford 

E, Simmons, was the owner of a store building and lot on which 

it was located, in Zion City, La};e County, Illinois, and 

the other « ^pfcllaat o, William H, Fabry and M. F, Ellis were 

'\ 
using a part of it under a lease from Simmons, as a drug store 

in vfhich they also sold cigars. A resident physician had an 

office in the b ilding. On May 3rd, 1915, after this condition 

fx^, ..-.'/• ,y*.. 

had existed for n6ne months or more, ^ipp-ei-leea, fourteen lessees 

A 
of residence properties nn the City of Xion, filed a bill for 

injunction to restrain such use of said building, and applied 
to the court for an interlo cutory decree enjoining such use 
pending the litigation. The application was heard on the bill 
and affidavits in support thereof, and affidavits of the def- 
endants who appeared and without answering the bill, resisted 
the application. A decree was entered restraining the defend- 
ants, until the further order of the court, from using any 
part of said preaises as a cigarette, cigar or tobacco store] 
or a place for the manufacture or sale of to bacoo in any form 
or manner; or pharmacy, apothecary shop, or drug store; or a 
place for the manufacture of sale of drugs or medicines of 
any kind; or the office or residence of a practicing physician, 
surgeon, or other person aotua ly engaged in the practice of 
medicine or surgery, Th^s defendants prosecute this appeal, 
and the question here is whether the trial covirt was acting 
within its sound judicial/di9«qretion under established legal 

principles in granting t^e preliminary injunction, 

/ 




.IS«8 ,oM .neO 
aaelleqqjs ,l£ ife ^no^xfi^ .H rfqeeoL 
• 9;{xiJ saoxl IjssqqA ev 

a,a*nj8lleqqij Ijs && ^•^idB'K ,H awiXXJtW 

doiriw no &ol bcis sniMix/cT eiote « ^o isnwo 9rf;t bbw ^e^o^Imi8 ,1 

fcnjB ^axonlXXI ^^^nwoO qiIbJ »y*xO noJtS fli ^bed-BooX aaw Ijt 

eaew aJtXXa ,% ,M Jina ^^cfs'T .H mBilLt^ ^ a #fl joXX o qq i» Tsrirf'o erf* 

eao;fB 3x/a£i jb ba ^anommJcS norc^ aajBSI e ashnx/ J'i to ta«q b snlaxr 

n« IxBxl fljBxoiexrfq ^nsbxesa A .aiB^io bXos oeXi5 ^sdi rioiffw at 

aottlbaoo airf# net^s .gXSX .MS vbM xiO .anlbXl d »i-f;t nx ooil?:o 

aesaseX nseif'xx/ct (&a$^.ftc£;i ^srtoot to 8ri;fnoffl enAn lo'^ be^axxa had. 

Tol XXicf & bBltt jflolX lo x^tO SffJ nr aeiJaeqoaq ©•nsJbiasi 1o 

beJtXqqfi baB (^nlMlucT biBS lo eau rioua nXjsT^faei o:^ aottoaulal 

•axr rioua gniniotne ©eioefc yioJ-x/o oXTe^ni n« aolt *ix;oo sdt ot 

XXld eri;f no jbXBsri ajBW rtoid'BOiXqqfi ©(fT ,xioxi'B3ii'iX eciS 3nil)nsq 

-Isb 9/[* to aiflVBbilt* l)n£ ^toeierfJ J-Taqqira nl B&tyBbtlts bas 

betBtaBX (XXld ©ifcf ^nlnewanjs tuod&tvi has l>dT£9qq£ o/iw a^fafibn© 

-ftneteb 9di 3nJtnljBi*a©a beiefae a«w ©eioeb A .flOi^BOiXqqjs eri* 

^« gnlai; morct (i-ouoo erfJ- to asfcrto ierf*ax;t erfJ- Xli-ni; ^Btas 

[trota oooBc/o^t to aa^lo ^BttBt&Qto s bb aeaiaeiq btsB to tx&q 

miot Yn« nX ooojsd o& lo eXaa lo ©oif^OfitunBrn ecit rot eojsXq £ lo 

M 10 jeiorf^e gwab 10 ^qorfa yiBoerfi'oqB (YO-affi^Brfq ^o iTLBtia&sn no 

to aenlolbem 10 agirai) to eXsa to ©ax;*ojBtx/nBm &fit lot ©ofiXq 

,nBiolevrfq gnlol^roBiq a to sonefciasT lo ©oltto arirf^ 10 ;t>nl]I yn« 

to ©olifojBiq Bdi ni bB^B^ttB xl ButOB aoBieq isrfJ-o to ^aoB-gxuB 

«I«eqqjs Btd^ e^tuoeaoiq ad'aBh^eteh ©riT ,x^83r£jj8 to eaXoXbdin 

gnld'OB aBW Jti/oo LBi.it edi lerf^a-ffw aJt aierf aotSBBup ©ri* fcnB 

y 

XjBgaX JberialXdB^fae iBbnu aottBip4]iB\l.Bi:otbul bauoB Bit nJtd^xw 



< 



The affid^its read on the hearing are incorporated 
in the record, certified ^Y the clerk of the coxixt. There 
is no certificate of evidence, therefore we assxime that we 
cannot take notice of their\ContentB, (Lange v Heyer, 195 
Ill»'430; W'^eatley v Mracek and Gettert, 160 111. App, 646.) 
We will asHume for the purpose of. this decision that the court 
on a consideration of the "bill and all the af'^idavite filed, 
was warranted in finding that the a. legations of fact found 
in the bill were true, \ The theory of the bill it*- that John 
Alex, Dowie, in his lifetime, prior to 18S9, organized a reli- 
gious sect opposed to the business and practices sought to be 
enjoined, and various other forms of business regarded legitimate 
and proper in civilized cor^munities, and etill other practices 
that are generally condemned as immoral and illegal; that in 
1899 the site of Zion City was selected as the location of the 
society in which such business and practices should be prohibited; 
that in furtherance of that purpose Bowie obtained title to 
nearly ail the land within the present city liaite and executed 
leasee for the term of 1100 tears containing restrictive cov- 
enants against said uses; that a building plan was also adopted 
to that end, and various statements were publicly made and 
published by Dowie proclaiming such purpose; that afterwards 
Dowie became insolvent and with his property, including a Isjrge 
portion of the land within the limits of Zion City, passed into 
the hands of a receiver under the control of a federal court, and 
the receiver made sales of the property in various waye and 
under veurious restrictions that resulted in maintaining such 
restrictions as to all land sold; that the result of these facta 
4^ that the owners of land in the City of 2: on holding by or 

under titles containing such restrictive covenants -»*«• bound by 

'•^ 

-? 

the covenants, and also that the owners of land there situated 



sierlT ,;fTjjoo srii- lo i^JCo edt \cf fia^lii^tsb \btotf8i e.-rf ai 



ew J-Brfd- ©Bu/eaB eV sYoleisri* ,eon©felve Ito ed-BOili^aeo on at 



sex jiexsH V egnaj) ,i*neJTtoo ^ierfi to «?ol;fofl Bi&l fodcieio 

jijt/oo 9di tsuii a<^t&loeb m^fi^^iq %BQqTu<i Jd^dS ^-m^ 9isuaB£ XX iw eW 

.;c^ti»eX^t «^iT.«^i\l« 94^ ,XX4 iu^tB IX<£<:f-,«xI| to ao^isiebiasiotiJi ^ 

l>nx/o2 to«t lo 9aoli^jQ9ij&,9di; t&di ^J^fynll at beiasiiA'f ej$w 

8cf o^ ^dgaoe 6QoXo8«7q |}£[£ f aaQ^eiJoT .94;|^ .9^ l^eaoqqo ^P98 ai/pig 

e^£ffiiti39X £)a6X£3sz aeaai:Bj;/d' lo em^tot xarf^p. a^oiii^v bna ^ibffitolas 

.;,Bae^^o«3q 7sxiito ;^X:|^«, lui'S ^ae^^Xairfliiioo ^a^i^'^V'^o aX jfq^QTLq^baz 

Xi_^ ni*«4^ 4|jBjaXX4:^« Xjsaoaucl p« beflu^Jbaoo, YXX«a?<59§; a?* tedt 

ibett^tdoiq scf MifoAs eaojtj-o«2q Jb£(£ aaaaiipvtf xlojje, ilpl^F aj^ ^la^pye 

p^ aX^xd- tenX^^cfp ai»oa aaoqii/q ;t«If;^ lo 8Pa£3ar(^iir1 fft J^isdt 

batueexe ba^ Bttntl xtio iaea^^q, Qdt aid^i^. ba£L^fd^.flfj_^1^^9a 

-roe avi^oxx^aaa saxalA^flOfi 8i«at OOiX to atJ^i *dt^.^ %oi sea^aX 

ibd;i-90^ OBl£ 8«w A£Xq g^lbXiucf £ is4f {B9Bii bi&9 tBoJiJ&i^ atfi&a» 

tas aJbtfitt xL9iLdii<i ezaw etaamaJ'sj-e 8x;oxxav baa ^bas Sejdt^ot 

•l>%fiwxalt£ t&dit ;^«oqxuq dftua sniioifXfiaiq aXwoQ i^cT texleXXcfx/q 

a^xeX £ gaibxfXpni ^Y^xeqQxq eln' dti^n ixi& is^syloBJCi.1. e^OBd 9i^f9^ 

o&at fcaaaaq ^x^iO rwjiS to e^jtautt axi;^ atdtXv JulbI sdt. 3,{K,aia,Xtj^<l 

bne ^t^uJQs^^^ l»t9J>»t £ tp Xoi^xios 9di iBbau xevXesis^ £ to Bixifid^ a;l^ 

, bOA •YJaw Bi/oxxBV nX x^isqoiq 9di. lo 8aX£B 8Xi£rr( ley^ippa^ Qdt 

douB T^Xaxstat&a. at bBiluBQi i&dJ BjXQXt.pt'itB9%.Biipt'SMyT9bau 

B^o&l AnexlJ to ^XuafiX sd;t ;f&iiJ^ lJ!)Xob JbtctfiX XX# o;^ «i.£ .aflql^piilaai 

^ XCf 3aXX)Xo£f xxoS to x^-'^O ©^^^ nl basI,"Xo B%9amq 9dS tAdS -*± 



> 



r 



i}A:i'jt(ri^ ta BtArf:t . JtrLA-C .\i\ BTAAlia a^.'J' :^Jtr(l qbLa bn& .B^OMiBVIiO . Bdt 



I 



p 



holding under titles in which there .AXfl no restrictive cove- 

^ ^.^^^^ ^ 

nants »£« also bound if they purchased with knowledge of the 
A 

plan upon which the said city was founded,"™) 

Appellees' able counsel required two hundred pages of typewriting 
to set forth in the hill the matters relied on by them to support 
their right to an injunction. Very full, exhaustive briefs and 
argiiBents are presented here by counsel for both sides on the 
legal effect of the allegations in the bill<, The briefs are 
for the most part devoted to questions that must be determined 
by a court on the final hearing of the cause calling for an 
I I investigation of the merits of the casK that is not undertaken 
by either trial or reviewing courts in determining the propriety 
of a preliminary injunction. It if3 urged in the arguments that 
a matter of public interest concerning the title to much property 
is involved, which is manifestly true, and such questions 
might better be left to the final hearing and be decided in a 
proceeding where the decree of the trial court can reach 
the supreme court for review that principles cnay be announced 
that can be acted upon as rules of property. Any decision that 
we may render, or view that we may express has no hinding effect 
on persons or property not included in this suit, and there is 
no appeal from this court in this caae« There seems to be a 
dearth of authority in this state on gome of the questions here 
involved, yet we think the principles are well established and 
settled on the authority of t; e text books en the subject, 
and decisions of other states. Our supreme coiirt in People v 
Grand Trunk Ry, Co, 333 111, 393, quoting from a former case 
said, speaking of the remedy by injunctions "The tendency eeeme 
to be to greatly abuse it," Tiie appellate court of the first 
district in Young v Federal Union Surety Co, 183 111, A.)p. 378, 
cited Beach on Tnjunctlone, Sec, 110 and High on Injunctions, 
Sec, 13, on the proposition that the merits of the case are not 



8 
-evoo eyttotrtBBT on aaa.^ eaerf;^ dolriw ai eelit jtt xebnu gnlblod 1 

^bebmro"^ Bcfr -xfiotieid^f B^ikft'ttoqu Mslq 

tioqqxMi o* «©rf;f Ycf «o fteiXsTr aTtettjsiH ^TsW XXJtcfVrtf Hi 'rfrf^^ol 'f&i'"c4 

» <Kfjr no asbia ri[#ocf ^tol Xasnuoo Tfcf exeri fieJaeeexq isx* aJrteai/ai* 

#16 «"iei:xcf ©nT »XXicf eri/ nx Birt)J:tJsr>»XX« &rf* "^O toslt© XxgeX 

l>eni:«i'X9tdJb acf ^um ;}-ef{d' anoJt^Gsxrp ot batovsl) ;Msq ^ecia 9d^' ^ol 

£UB «ol gcJtXXso 9BifBO edf to gnlxjBSri i«ritl ferid- ffb tii/oo «" Y^ I , 

a^ietrehcia i<M t£ t£fi& meao 9iif lo etixsm »ffir to RoliAstiiBrat |l 

i(i-frix«roxq »if# sffiflisx«tafj at •txm>o gnJrwsjtve"! Xo laii* x©ri#i»'\cf 

#en* e^J-fl^r^irgxfi eirf* ni fcsgxr; ei *I .aortottulat '^iBnlsiltsxq' A \o 

Tf^iaqotq riocm o* dX*i* sri:^ -ga tnHQoa ot> taeie^itl olXcfjjq lo »*#«■"«! 

affoi:*a«irp rioira bnjB ^ei/t* Y-J-^ssliiiTBin ai jfftlrTw ^ftevXoval ai 

« ni 6»bio©f) ©d" bflfi gniiBSrf l&nlt srf:f o* ^teX ©d aei-;ted d'iisiai 

rfojsei ctao karroo istti^ eat lo ©eroeb &:ii' eierfw" grtibeeooiq 

6eom;oan£ stf y*w asXqionAtq tnAf weivei Tolt ifxi/oo ©msiqwa tidt _ 

t4Sif* floiaioel) ^nA .^^asaoiq iJo a©Xx/i a£ aoqts b^foa 9<!' ajioimdt' 

io^ttB gflibfticf on B«ff aasxcrxe yJ5» aw tfirfj w«1y xo jXeBrreT'tiiB* 

ai ea©Ef;J- bnje ^ttus airft ni hebx/Xoni *Ofl "^j-tsqoxq 16 aiJtoaTeq no 

s •cf ot anrddB eredf .aa^o airfdf' ni tTxroo olrft molt X^eqqA on 

ax«ri Bootte^up e^t to ©rooe no ©d-js^a airf* ni Y^^'ro^^'i''* '^^ df'iJie/h 

io'*ojB i>erfBlXcfB*ae Xlew sxjb aeXqioniiq Bdt tatdf ©w f»X ttstiovni 

o.t*;A ,#oe(;d"i;a ©rfd- no aafoocf *xe* ©^f* lo -^ttioifftlB edt no baX^^fea 

^^ •iqo©'? ni *xi;oo ©fflsxqjjB xifO .tsre^fij^a xsififo lo anoieioeb baa 

9a«o x©mxol 4s wox"* gni;foi;p ^8eE ,XII 'StS .00 .yiT atouiT bn«aO 

ama©a xonefinst ©rPT" :aor*onx;tni xrf ^fcenei ©rft lo gniateaqa j&iaa 

jJ'BXil^ e;i* lo *7x;oo etaXXaqqa ©rfT ".ti ©bucTb ^fXtJiaug "o* ji^^> 

,dTt' .(nA"«iXI £8i ,oO t*©XixR noinU XaisfcaT v gniroY «i foit*«il) 

(•MioifC2HE/(;^t bo ds^B^'i' OXX .os^ «aao{:^onx/tat no ^jboS hd'tlo 

.. . -.. .. ^.-i I 



pas -ed on in considering a preliminary injunction , "but tl.s 
court ahould inquire whether leae harm will result to the en= 
joined party if he should be finally victorious than would 
accrue to the complainant from the absence of the injunction 
if he were a winning party, and quoted from RuBsell v Farley 
105 U. S. 433: 

"It is a settled rule of the co\r t of chancery in actions on 
applications for injunctions, to regard the comparative injury 
which would be sustained by the defendant if an injunction 
were granted, and by the complainant if it were refused. 
(Kerr on Injunctions, 309, 310) And if the legal right is 
doubtful either in point of law or fact, the court is always 
reluctant to take a course which may result in material injury 
to either party, " 
And from the City of Hewton v Levis, 35 CCA 161;- 

I "Hfhen the questions to "e ultimately decided are serious 

and doubtful, the legal discretion of the judge in granting 

the writ should be influenced largely by the consideration 

^' that the injury to the moving party will be certain, great 

and irreparable if the motion is denied, while tie inoon- 

jvenience and loss to the opposing party will be inconsiderable 

I and may well be indemnified by proper bond if the injunction 
is granted*" 

It is said in A. & E, Enc. of Law, Vol. 16, page 346, a prelim- 
inary injunction may aorretimes be properly refused u::on the 

I same facta which would entitled the party of right to an in- 
junction on final hearing. It is said in 33 Cyc, page 740 the 
object of a preliainary injunction is "To maintain the status 
quoi to maintain property in its existing condition; to prevent 
further or impending injury - not to determine the right itself," 
On page 741- "It will not be granted where it is not apparent 
that any injiiry at all will occur," 



\ 



-9»rf* tffd t aol*»ni/t"l Yi£i-tlmlleiq a grrlisfcienoo al ho &©«B«q^r 
-as erf* o* tlU9@t Lltv aiaarf eR»I lerfJerfw ©itii/pni bXi;orf« i^rtjud^' 
Mx/ow nsdt BuotioiQl-7 tfllBnlT: erf MifOria ftrf T:i y*ioq fcanlot^ 
flOiiJoairtnl erf* io ©ortsacfjs eAt boiI: *flB/tifiIq«oo ©ff* 6*"Btf«i»i4^ 
TjaXijs? T XleasuH arortt l>e*oir|3> fcit* ^Y*^*^ gnlnflii* b etew eif^lt* 

;C£^ .8 .11 a©i 

flo afloitojs at ^raoasdo 1o * xroo srf* lo eljtfi belttse b el ^la-^i-s 

XXij^at svl*£iBqffloo s.i* fetfl^?-! ot ^inott&nu^ai tot anoif&Qi.lqqs 

btirM9tfOttistat na \t tttAbR^tsb 9di ycf BHakMfBua ecf MtfOW rioiffw'^ 

.Aeex/lai aaew tt \t ^ftJsrrlBXqwo© 8rl# ^rf Ijflfi ,bd*ajBTg ate*- 

ei i-Mgit iBgeX •rf* ^l fcrrA (OXS ^GOS ^Baot&oaut^i no tiSl}^ 

Bxe^JiK at J 1003 #rf* t*o/3t 16 tTisX ^o ^rrloq fti ^rf*ie" XirlJdx/oS^ 

^Ti/^fli Xjsiaatjsm ai tXi/Bet tsf^ doJtrfw eaiB^oo « a^Iad^ ot *rt**ouIa«^ 

» ,t^^«q aerfd'la 'o* ^ 

~ji3I AOO 3S »BivsJ V no*W9^ ^o v;f rO erf* «oTt Bai[-^ 

BiToiiBB ezB bebtQeb y(Le&Bmttlu e f o* affoi*8«up ©rfi^-neriW^ 

BflWflBia cl »§6irt erf* Yo aoiiBi&Btb Lb^bL ©ri* ^Jjs^&t^itob ttdi^ 

noj:*«T©bx8noo ©rl* y^ Y-^^S^s-^ f)©ofls»ifllnl act blu^siB itr^ eift-^ 

tserg ^al&tt90 sd Xliw \tiaq gnivoK ©rf* o>t YTu-Jifli aif* *«i» 

-cooni a :* eXlrfw ^fceinsft at aoi&6m ©ri*'%l^ eXcteiBqaiil JSoi^] 

BLdAzebtnnooat sd XXlw y*i«<? gnXaoCToo ©rfx+ o* aaaX f>rtfi eoffelnet^P 

noi*oni;tnl erf* 1:1 Jbnod isqoiq y^ fiei1tln»9bai acf XXov?' Ye« baa '^' 

-ffllXfriq e »6^E ©5£q tSX .XoV tWJsJ ^o .onJT .3? * .A at biae vlf-VS'^f 

»rl;t noru baairlea yXieqo^Eq ©cf aa»X*sfnoe Yan «oi:*oflif(;flt Y^arlf' 

-ffl as o* trfgJtT to Y*^e<T e^^ fe©X*i*fr© hltfofr rfoirfw ajfoa^ "Wtxaa- 

eii^ 017 6^Bq .otO S8 fli blaa ai *T .gniTcari X*nll «a floi*aaat~' 

8i;*»*a eil* fflataXjeffT oT" ai flol*oni/tfft Yi^rrlMlleiq « %0 toetrfb^l 

tnsvaaq o* {aoitihaoo aaltetx© a*i at Y*«^OTq alfiJ-alBo 0* j[Oap^' 

" .lleatl *d8Xi erf;)^ enima»*eb o& toff - Y'^trtal 5fribna<T«l to TSrf*llft ' 

*neTJBqfTij toa ai ft aierfw betauTg ©cf *oft XXiw *!" -I^'?^ •§««! iSi^!^ 

. 1 



5 



ftndon page 749 - *Great caution is to be used in issuing man- 
"^ datory injunctionSe ****** The complainant must make 
out a clear case free from doubt and dispute," 
On page 751 jl The iseuance of a temporary in-^unction to maintain 
the statue quo depends chiefly upon tfee relative inconvenience 
t& be caused the partieSe 
I ' And on page 753; »The right asserted b3^ oomplainant, however 
mufttbe perfectly clear and ffee from doubt where the effect 
of a preliminary inj\inct1on will be more than merely the main«= 
tenance of the status quo, or where the injunction will cause 
defendant greater lose and inconvenience than that which will 
/ be suffered by the complainant in the absence of an injunction. 
In any event, an injunction must be refused ***** if he 
(Somplainant) does not make it appear reasonably probable that 
j an irreparable injury is impending and v;ill occur before the 
. final hearing can be had," 
On page 756; "IJThen the question oiS law is one of the chief 
■<rSi9sues to be determined on the final hearing, and complete 



l/ 



D 



relief can be then afforded, the complainant is not entitled to 
,the prelimina^ry injunction. An injunction ^viil not be granted 
/where there is grave doubt as to its propriety or necessity." 
/On page 763, *A preliminary injunction will not, as a general 
rule, be granted in cases where it in not shown that any 
irreparable injury is immediately impending and wi?.l be visited 
upon complainAnt before the case can be brou^t to a final 
hearing, * 

Tlie above quotations from the text of Cyo are most of them 
supported by a great number of citations, generally from the 
reports of other states and the federal courts. The author, 
however, does not note any decision of this state in conflict 
with the general principles that he announces. A reference 



a» 



-njsra 3aix/aei nl 6s8x/ ecf o* ei noi:*iijBO ;tJBeTC* - 6*7 ©s«<j nofiai*^ 

eijB0 *ajjffl tnsnJtBXqaoo e/lT ****** ,8floiJonx/£nl x*^®*** f^ 
"eft^fuqeih bnB *cfjt;oi> «oal ©ei^ eaifb xeeXo 2" 768^| ' 

a8ve'.*rcff ^ (fnjsnjtjslqinoo ^cf bsjasaea trfgi^c srfT* ;5cY'da«q ao baA. \ 
toe lie isrfV"' *cfi/oi> flioat ee4!t bna' i«»JC6' TjlJos^leq ed^aMT i 

=i3lBm erf* YJtsiteffl jciBrf* eaom scf XI iw aortortirt^i X^t^nimfXs'iq «'to ^ 
eaujBO Iliw floi*oni.rcxixsrfj- ©lerfw lo ^OiJp Bui&iB eriV'lo eonfine'J 

Iliw rfoJtriw iBiit tt£[i^ Bonetaevaooai. has aaoi aeiaeti *«J5-bnVieI> , 

" ■ .' "O.T '-^ (. 1 ~ • ^ -'••06 

.noitorriftfii ns lo eorteacTfi e:iS ni *njBfiJt«Iqwo^ &dt yn Ijeistlx/a ea ^ 

t-'^ 't :.'■''."' R ^ :^ P f ft; .♦t --'if !^ ' i '- 

♦ * * * fceejjlst sd" &eum aottoaulat iijb , Jrievs y^« ilT 

tadi elcfficfo^tq YXcfjBflOBBei i£BqqB ;tj: ejTjBm ton asofi 'fifri'JBffifiic^od/ 

erf* eiolsd" 11/000 Xlivr i^nB gnifinsqmx st ^^utrti ©IdBiisqeaijt oe 

".bjBrf sd flfio gnlie&fl lanl^ . 
'lexdo erft to eao et vbI ao aotieeup edi nerfW" ;32t S3Bq"5(5l 
etdlqffloo fiajs ^snjtxserf larril s:::^ no benim^istsl) sdf 0*' ieueelS^ 
od" £»el*xtrt9 J-on ejt ^nenljBlqmoo ©rit 4fiebio1:1:j5 nerft sdr fisb leiil^il ^ 
JbetiJ^'ig 9d ton Iliw aottoaislai. ak ^aoi&oaulai \ifintiisltetci sftf ,1 
".Xtiaaeosn 0:0 •^teixqoiq stl ot 6i5 &duob evjsag ai" eianJ^STflSct) 
IjBiansg a bjb ^*on iliw aottotwlai x'^^nimlleiq k*'^\tdV egaq^nO \ 
Yn£ tJBrft flworfa ton bi ti sisrfw aeaBO nx batxiaia' ed ^eIx/1' 
batJtaiv ed X:J:w bne -gnibaBqmi YXetalbamml ai -^Xi/tni erdaiBqea'^l' 
I*nil s ot tr^i/otcd sd neo saBO srft siolsd tniUiiMlqmoo ii6c^ 



N 



a.^t C^t' , . , ,.:...,_.,.,' 

merft lo taom sib o^O lo txet srft moil afloxiatoirp svodB ©rfT 

•rit aoTl xXlB^snss tanoxtBtlo lo Tsdau/n tae'ia * ''f<^ ijetiaqqi/b 

^zorftJjjB sriT .atiijoo iBiQbsl srft fon* aetata tsntb 10 atxbcial 

tolllnoo rii: etBta alrft lo aoistoBb ^sfi etoa toix aedb ^^eva't^orf 

eoneaelsi A .aeoni/onn* erf tjsrit aelqioniiq laieifss erf:f riti"»r 



to the volumes of "Annotations of Cyc" showing: decisions on these 
various points since the publication of the volume from which 
we have quoted, discloses t at most of these principles have 
since that time beenrestated or recognized again and again 
by our federal and state courts. This opinion might be extended 
to great length by citing and discussing those cases. 

In the late case of McMillan v Kuehnle, 78 N. J, Eq, 
351, the court considered an application for a temporary in- 
junction by owners of dwelling houses near a baseball park to 
restrain holding baseball games there on Sunday, the bill charg- 
ing that crowds attending the game, by noise and confusion, 
disturbed the peace and quiet of the neighborhood, and held 
them not entitled to the writ. The court said,- 

*Such a writ ought never to be ordered unless from the pressure 
of an urgent necessity. The damage which it is legitimate to 
prevent during the pendency of a suit must be in an equitable 
point of view of an irreparable character", (Citing authorities) 
And quoting from an earlier authoritji - *It is impossible to 
emphasize too stringly the rule so often enforced by this court 
that a preliminary injunntion will not he allowed when the 
injury which may result from the invasion of the complainant's 
right is not irreparable," and added - That the injury com- 
plained of could not be KcixxzsxKd considered as an irreparable 
mischief and that if it be conceded that the disturbance is 
of such a character as to entitle complainants to an injunction 
on a final hearing of the cause, still it is not so aubstantial 
as to warrant the issuing of a temporary writ. 

In Uefex v Somerville Water Co, 79 N, J, Eq, 613, the court said 
"The object of a preliminary injunntion is to prevent some 
' threatening irreparable injury pending a full and deliberate 
' investigation of the case upon the merits. It will not be ordered 

unless from the pressure f an urgent necessity and v^rhere the 
. damage threatened diiring the pendency of the suit is of an 



9B6dt no enoxBloef) gniworia "o^O lo 8iTOJt*fi4onnA" to aenii/Iov edt ot 
dotdtr moxl emuXov sdi %q aoiijiotiduq edt eon Is Btatoq ejjojtzjsT 

8V£x{ Bslqloalaq ftasji^ ^9 ^boir i^ i aeeoloexh .Jbe^otrp dV£if aw v 

.... . - ■■ , of ib . . - 

ai&^a has. nlB3£ bes^tngooei lo i^e^BJ-sexaescf eniif ih«if^ eoale 
&8i>n9^xa acf ;filgi:a aoialqo axrlT .8;fix;oo hi&iB ha& L&XBh^\ xe/o ]^cf 

,p3 .t> .Tf 8V ^elxxrfex/l v ajsXIlMoM lo asBO et£l sxf^ a\ 

-nJt x^fi^fJ^fflSi*" R ^ot noii-BOiXqqjB «« Jbeaefoienoo tauoo ©rfi' ,X5fi 

. " ^^,A.q 'to 
o# jfa^q Xi«creaj3cf jb lA^to. ^9i%isQ& ^aJtXXewJb lo eiermo \^ aol^oai/t 

.. *'r:c -■'■"■ ■ ■ "■ ■ •■ ■ ■' '' ' '-•"' 

-^UBffo XXlcf exlif ^Y<<B^^^^ no ettsn^f aecn^s XXBcfea^cf snlbXorf flla-x;fae'i 

laoiaulffoo ha& eeion ycT «eaiB3 axfi^ yaibcL.'^i i & e£>woao t&At gai 

fcXeff htii- ^ioorfiocfrfgisn arlJ- lo ^alirp hsx& doaeq arid' bacfiuJalb 

-♦ojfcBe i-ijjoo erfT .tiiw srfd^ oJ- beX^i^aa ^ojn atarii' 

sox/aaeiq ©riJ iao"!! aeeXnu Jisasbio ©cf oc^ isvsn tfrfgj;/© *Jtiw £ xtOi/8'" 

ot ei'£inJ:it'l39X ex ii rfolrfw e3£fii£b erfT .Y^laeeoaa ^as^rtx; a£ lo 

©Xcffiifxnpe n£ xii ©cf Jeym ^xi/a is lo YO^sJ^f^sq srfJ- gnixuf) ^neveiq 

(aairf^iaorirf^x/fi gnlj^xO) ,»a©d'0£i£jri:o aXcffiifiqeaijt iX£ lo weiT lo ^nioq 

o;^ dXdisaoqffiX ex tl** - j;^J::£Ox(J-u£ xeJtXaaa a& M07l 3al;rox;p i)£Uk 

j-iuoo Bldi vcf bsoaolne ne^lo oe elxxi s/fit tf-tsnliJa oo^ asXaerfqas 

•fiJ' neifw JbswoXlB eci Jon XXiw aoxd-floutnlyafinitBjtXattq £ *£il^ 

a'itn«ni£Xqffloo ariJ lo noie£VxrJt arfJ moil JXi/asi Y£ra rioXrfw \iii\^. 

-ffloo yixjcnl ©ifJ JailT - fiahba baa " .alcffiifiqaiii *on ai Jriali 

eldfifiqsTix n^^ e£ baaebxenoo AazxxMXMUi sd' Jon bXxroo to Jbeal£Xq 

Bi sonficfaud-aJtb eifl JfiilJ bebeonoo ad Ji Ix iBAi luus laJtrioaim 

floi:*orti/(;ni: nz o& BtanntfiLqaoo ©XJirJne oJ as laJaaafirfo £ riowa lo 

l^ttaatBdsjB oa Joa ai Ji LlttB ^eBx/£o srii^ lo gniifierf XBctil a no 

.itxxw Y^fiioqeisJ £ lo gnix/aei arlJ *fl£ai£W o* B£ 

btoB txuoo ©riJ ^£Xa ,pa .L .H GV ,oO ust£W aXXivTemoB ▼ latsM fli 

anoa *nev©aq o& et rtoitaaiJlai-^i&almtleTq a lo ^ostdo sxfT* 

e^£i8diXeb bn£ XXx/1 £ gnlbneq Y^u;t^-t 8Xd£a£q8'xil snlae^BSXd^ 

b9'i9bib 8d Joff XXiw ;tl .BitXBia edi aoqu 8a£0 @dJ lo aoiis^ttBBvai 

Bdt eierfw has x^^aedoen Jne^xu n£ lo aix/aaaiq add- moid aeaXmr 



(irreparable character," (Citing authorities) 
In the case of Blanohard v Eastern Pennsylvania Power Co, 80 
N. J, Eq. 10, it is held if the complainants case rests on a 
legal right which is not clear and has beenfairly questioned 
then a preliminary injunction cannot be granted. (Citing autho r- 
ities) In Fredericks v Huber, 180 Penn. St. 573. the court, 
in holding a prelininary injunction, restraining the use ofa 
church improperly granted, oaid that it^ effect was practically 
to reverse the whole status of the parties, and added = "Tnis 
is not the office of a preliminary injunction, which is not to 
subvert but to maintain the existing status until the merits 
of the controverqr can be fully heard and determinedi" 
And adds = *That the status quo which will be preserved by 
preliminary injunction is the last actual, peaceable, nonoontested 
statue which preceded the pendinf^ controverayo " 
In Snod grass v MoDanieli, 144 Iowa, 674, the court applied the 
rule that the purpose of a temporary injunction is to preserve 
the B^tatuB quo of the parties and not to obtain affirmative 
relief in advance of the trial. 

We find in Richards v Meissner 158 Fed, Rep. 109, the following 
language in relation to granting a preliminary injunction- 
"Tlhile it does not finally determine the rights of the parties 
to the action, and is intended only to preserve the existing 
status until the case can be fully heard, end therefore tm it is 
not necessary that the court should, before granting it, be 
satisfied that the complainant will certainly prevail upon the 
final hearing of the oasa, the coxirt should, nevertheless, be 
careful that the complainant has a probable right, and that 
there is probable danger that such right will be defeated 
v/ithout the special interposition of the court. It is equally 
tru« that where, on the showing made at the preliminaryh earing. 



«s»^ 



8 
T 

"T odiujs gni^jtO) .be&asi-g erf *ofliT«o Hox^^ofli/^fli YiArrimiXsTtq i ae^if 

4*ajLfOo s-1* .aV5 .^8 .act»<{ 081 ^xdcfj^H v aiioiaefjsrtl ol (asJtJl 

Aio aaii edS gnixiifii^Bei »flox^orrx;cxii ^UBfiirtllaaq « ■gaibS.oA at 

oJ ioa el iioirfw ,«or*oni/gnJ: yxenifliiXsrcq e lo sojtllb'ari/ Vifiiii ai 
" »fisnjtmi9jsi) bflB feiserf y^iLtr^ erf hjbo ^T8Vot#hoo eif* lo 

. . . f s r 

Ycf i>e-ri9Banq erf XI iw rfoirfw otrp Bij***8 a/f* '^BrfT* - ai>b« bnA 

be^fsscraoofloa ^slrfAeoBsq ^Ibsj&om taj^Z sAf bJ: aoj^t6n0(;a2 \Tsatmtlezq 

" .yeievoad'noo rjfiihneq erft bebeosaq xfoirfw SiJtBd'a 

9rf* jbexXqqB Jai/oo edS j^TS t^wol *AX .fXeinsCIoM v aa«X3 bon8 cl 



evaeesiq o^ ax aoitonnlat Yi'Stoqms^^ b ^o eaoqrutq edf t^t aXixx 
©▼JttffifliixltjB flljscfrfo o* ton bnjs aei^teq sriJ '!'o Oisp ButB^e edi 

.Xjsltt* ei^ lo eonavfeja nJt lelXsi 

3flJtwoXXo^ sriJ ^eox .qsfl *6eT: 8ex asrtaajtsM' v ebiBftoiH nJ; halit i»W 

-^ox*oni/(;ni: YxsnlmjtXeTq b gnitnBX3 b;)' noidt-eXsa al ea£x;3n*X 

aex^iaq ©rfj lo a^frialTc sri* BntmTsfehttl^ai'i ton asob J^i eXixW" 

SaWeixa erij evaeBeiq ocf vino bebnstnJ: al bns ^aoi^OB 9x[^ o/ 

Qt ti. mi eioletsrfJ brtP jbrtBerf y-tXi/l erf nBo eaBO exT* XWrnr MutistB 

e<S ^tt ^at&aB'rg eaolerf ^bXx/orfe trrtron erf* tarfif Y^^eeeoen ton 

edi aoqu XiBveiq vlatafieo XlJtw ^rrsfiJtBXqafOo drfJ *«ffcf bailaiifBB 

drf ^eBaX8rf,^iftV9Xi tbXi/orfa d-moo srft ^eaBO 9df to -gatxaBd Xeatt 

tAdf baa ,*da±i ©XrfBrfortq b BBd tiiBiriBXqwo© 9rf* #*fi:f Ii/leaBO 

beJ^gaBlab erf XXxw tf-rigli riox/e d-Brf* T&ghBb sXrfBrfoTcf al aiBxW 

yXxBiifB ax tfl .Jajjot; erfd- ^o noii-iaoqis^flri lAxoeqa aidt tisodtl^ 

(3ni;u«ilxiitaiflilXeTq erf^ t^B obBffl ^nlworfe erf;t ao ^aiarfw ^Brf^ aux^r 



/ 



the law as to ^he right to an injunction ie quite doubtful 
and that as much, if not more, injury wpuld probably ensue to 

the defendants than to "■ e complainants, and especially where 
in the pvent cf the bill boin^^ diemiased on final hearing, 
there is grave doubt cf an adequate redress to the defendant 
reeultinc from the injunction-, the court should refuse the 
application for a temporary injunction, and await action 
until all the faC-s appear on final hearing," 

The principles announced in ths foregoing author! tiesataaa 
s-eem reasonable, end r/e think they might bo taken as a guide 
by courts o. this state in passing on motions for temporary 
injunctions. Even on final i.earing our suprono court has said 
in Hill V Kimball, 369 111* 398;- "In cases T^here mandatory 
injunctions are asked for, » it is the duty of the court to 
consider "he inconvenience and dar.age that T;ill result to the 
aefendant as well :xs the benefit to accrue to the coniplainani; 
by "he granting of the wrlta, and where the defendant's damages 
and injuries will be greater by granting the writ than ^vill 
be the complainant's ben-^fit by granting the .Trit, or t^reater 

i 

'than -ill be complainants dairiagos by the refusal of it, the 
court Trill, in "he exercise of a sound discretion, refuse 
the TT-it.'" {Lloyd v Catlin Ocal Co. SIC 111. 460; Dunn v You- 
rrans, Z?A id. 34; 1 High onlnj unctions, 4th, Kd. sec. 2. 
and cases cited. ) Applying those rules to this -^ase 
're are unaole to cec any valid reason for the decree. If 
we assune that the complainants rill, on final hearing, be 
,entitle'i to an injunction, still the r-i'-^.intaining cf the or- 
jdinary drug store and physician' t* office In the City of Zion 
; during the pendency of the suit was not such a threatened 
mischief and injury as should be held irreparable in p-aesing 
on a motion for a temporary injunction. The restraining order 
did not isaue to maintain the status quo, but was in the 



^>4^ ,;.f auieTE b^osrie .iTwc^a .,.»i{;^, .^gaol^actftol ^^;t ^^9?^^,^S^*-C^f a"? ; 
agl J QMS ;f i £w« Jwii ^o i i onu ^l xxsi oq;m^$ ,jb . iq3>, n,o i tA^llq^z^^ . 

, .- ■ .1,!. it.. ■ 

•sa» se ijs i.:^<^iii& , .^nlg^T^t e^^; ,n j^ ^^3 ^QouQapf^ <^^-^^ pni^ttq ^^^^ ^ g* 

9sii ttti ic laajiiiea eiit;;^€f aegi^aujt.BiajBnijBX^flioo^ .©^^ XXly^^sx "J; 
•iffj? ^X- «aJC/Q t03* .Xil OXS ,90 X£00 G±X*4?.Q .v,fc3f04JJ^»!.||-j'Ji*% 



110x5 10 x^fiO ©xi:f ai eoXno a'asiof©udq[ ,t»g#.fnP*8 a*fX'E> T?-'?--'- 
gnxa-ijaq fix ©Xrf^x^qo-^ii ,i>l6ri ©d l)XifoiiB ©i) x^utjpjt bns .lelt^'^'*'"^* 



t&'oi9 ^iaisiiaQ'i. edl^ .uQiionulai TpBiocjax©*,^ T^t^tiSiit^fta^^^ag, 



»,.A.«^» «</-!■ ^&..^~»>.^ ^A ^,.r.«l ^^JV ».»^l 



nature of a mandatory injunction granting the relief sought 
by the bill in advance of a hearing on the nerits, and there- 
fore s\ich as rill not ordinarily he granted. There is grave 
dcuct about the law upon which the complainants' right to 
ultimate relief rests, Many questions arise as to the le^al 
effect of various facts averred in the bill, and whether a 
sound consideration of public policy will permit the en- 
fcrceraont of the rectrictive covenants relied on can only 
be knov/n after a final dewiBion of a court of last resort; 
and finally, the injury and raiohhief inflicted by a wronf:ful 
issuing if the v/rit suspending an established business 
during the pendency of the suit is one that cannot be ade- 
quately compensated in damages, and thergfcr^ the aefendants 
could not be adequately protected by the bond required, 
while the injury that would be sietained by the complainants 
in wronf.fully refusing the writ is of little importance. 

We are of opinion that the v.'rit should not have isou ed 
and that the trial court was not acting within its sound jud- 
icial discretion in entering the decree awarding it, therefore 
the decree should be rcvorssd* 

Reversed. 



\ 



-ne'dkf JxfflTeq IIlw Tjotldof Dilrfi/q ltd ifloij-jB-ielDlanoo ' fcfluroa 

xXno Hfio no bBflt^t SifttRft^^oxi evlittlrt^Q*t 6j1J lo itnorneciTO^ 

■"""''• Ho 881'c tBBl 16 irisdo b to aoiQt^ht} I^nlt Mfe letfta icfwoni orf 

aaanlteifcf BeilaficTiJaiis ftB 3ftlfcrte(jSifS ;tliw erff 11 gnlx/aai 

eJnBbrtJ&teJb ©if* eTotelaiff frfti < aesfirajpfc nl b^t^Ba^qmoo xXad-fii/p 
»6eTitrpe^ birotf edt t<i t>9^QBfot(i x^htBi'pBhB atf *o« DfiJ^O 

.«Sffi;*Toqfax el*Ht*rd ai tflW ©ft? anlssjlsi xtlifi.':^OTx al 
be irscJ: evBrr toh himi!t&' ftf% t^S^'^'f^^^ noifliqio Vo' eTta' eW •" 
-tot bnuoe 2*1 niffti'^ 3fTJt*3B *off 8i?w truoo lBii^'%W't£tit biiB 

.foesTsvpR 



> 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. (" ^^' I. CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk ol" the Appellate 

Court, in aud for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my ofBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this ^ 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 






/ / (; / 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE fCOURT , 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth day of October, 

in the year of our Lord one thousand ninfe hundred and fifteen, 

within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 

Preseftt--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, PresidgLng Jus,tice. 

'■'■' '^ ' ■ Hon. DUANE J .• CARNE S , Ju s 1 1 c|'e . 

y'^'.i.'-'--^- EOTx'. JOHN R, NIEHAU^V Jus tile! 

CHRISTOPHER C, DUFFY, ClerMT ^ ^ * 1 

$ . . 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff;-"' 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following-, to-wit: 



TAJJ5I'^ 



,■■; ; b e 1 1 "1 5 js w J 1 l' D 3 :( ►+ *!: n x f: - 



Gen, No. 6144. 

Christine L. Palm, appellant. 

avfl Appeal from ^finr.Swago. 

Eoc'<crc:r:dL City Traction Coirpany, ^opsller. 
Dib-il, ?. J, 

r 

On th-3 i7th. day of January, 1S13, at t'nj= cornsr of -acted 
Avenue and ceventli S'r^et,, in '.hs oity o^ Hock^-oxl in Winneoago 
Cou''.ty, C''.ri3tin3 L. ^alm f 5,11 "rom f;i3 step pf a oar operated 
by tias Kockford City Traction 'C^oiKpany -anl/rsosi /ad iajuri^i, /or 
which slis "brought thie iuit hO re'^ovs;?^ da.t!a:7S9. She fi:isd a dsc- 
laration, to vhich there .vas a pl§4i\of 'cha ^ansral i;3uo. Liter 
she ob*-ain3d leave to I'l^s, a.a.i' did file, four ajditional oounta, 
to which there was aiac a pZsa of ths general issue. A.t the trial 



jJetlvc^-^'^S^ 



tb^ J'-jj^uary tcrir. 1915, of the circuit court of that County, 
leaye was given '^ha plainti'.'f to a.'nend har dsclaration, -.vhich shs 



aia, by alleging that X^^^ conauctor of tne atrset car ne,3li^;;ently 
periTiittad the exit Icor of the car to r-.aain o an '-vhils the car 
was in motion, vvhich induced "rhe plii;'iti:h" to believe that ahe 
could aafsly aligiit and ir. doing 30 she w::-.3 i^ijurad bacauas th-s 
car had not b6:!n 3 topped./ The ^^efendant deinj/rrsd to ths arendrrent 
but th3 deniurrsr '.va.s ovsrruiad and +:h2 pisa of trs p:sneral i^3UQ 
:r,:£;r?i.y .Tiade to the original daclar^-fion, v/as ordered to ^tand 
: f/ie plea to ths a.Tsnded iount*-'^ At \h3 close of all i.he evi- 
dence the court instructed the jury to r^Aurn a vardict '"o^ the 
defendant, '-vhich .-^aa don©-; a motion for a .r^v trial ^^'as overruled 
/and the defendant ha4'' 3udg'r.er;t a>iainet t.^s pis^intiff, "rorr -vhich 
I plaiatiff oelovj a^-^eala* 

I Ths car in :;usation wad of ths "Pay-as-you-snter " type and 

api^aara to ha\/£ differed in at least oas important rrSpecu froiT. 

d ~1 
'.-.3 cara of that type now in use. The rr^ar p at-or-n was inclcsd / 



-p^ 



.e^IIdqq'^ nVinjeqaioO xioi^ojB^iT xtiO Jbio^i'ooH 
JbficSoer ^0 isHToo Sri* *£ «£IQX .Yt^irn^t.; lo y;/;£i .dd-Tc. en* nO 

tej/isco :exo s *i:-o q&.te srf* moi'' ii/j mX^T .J enxc^eltrn'O ^y^^'^J^oO 

/ 

/ \ 
Xiiaj arT* *.A .©ussi X^asc/sx s£f* lo jsslg ^ oaljs a^w STsrlcf rfoxxlw o* 

y ' ''^ V 

,Y*niroO rf-Jtirl? 'lo d-'p/oo ^iuoncic srl* ^o «gI^X maso'- Y'I*-'W-'^ ®f^* i^^ 
trfs ricxxivi ,noij-£i«-;XosJ: tsrl f^nemr ot I'jMaigeXq erf* nevig esw sv^eX 

^■£0 9ri* ^Xirf?.' ns c nl£ni£i o* la^ erl-t io tcooX' Jlxs eri? jbsiJXmisq 

©rfe *jsu.t svsiXecf o* lil^irixilq orl* teoxrini rfoiriw ^noid-om ni b£?.' 

eriit eatrxoBcf h^iis'^^sxl sj=.w srie oe gniot ni b.aj^ ;^asXX<e YXe'J^-Be JbXxroo 

*nscRJbnjr.!£, ?ri.t o* i>siTJ»(me^ jfzLaJbns'JtQ^ erfT UteqqoJe nsscf Jon t)/5ri iro 

©jueei Xjc-san*^! srf* Ito jse^g srlt £>fx£ fceXwiiavo ei?v,' "xeiixfinsL erii *i;o" 

tn^*£ o* tsistuo ex:w «noill^/jBXosi: X^ni^iXio sri^ o* oXj^m Y^^its'^^o'- 

-jtv9 ar.M Lis lo secXc &a/ *A ^-.d-nwoc. fcei;::!^^^ erf* o* Jsexq en* e. 

Sri* TO? Joxtisv £ nuj't^T o* Y^J^C ^t^ £)e*ojJi*eni; *ii;oo arf* ©onsX 

ijsXu-fxsvo S£W X£iT:* ws'n £ lol noi*on! £ ^i-^not exiw rfoirfw ,*n£tns^eX 

riclrfw aioi: 4'iii*ni^q erf* *8nX£gfi J^nsmgi^ju ^ "^&£ri d-n^XiflslsXi srf* tnj.^ 

.aXjssVjB woXsd lli:*nXjcXc 

inoTi; i-oeqesT d-n£*aoqmJ: ©no *8£eX *x nl i)ei9mJb evxiri o* eijseqqjs •' 
feeoXcni «i5w' nT:ro''.+r:q is.^t sr'T .©su ni won ©CY* c^^ri* io eiic tr; ' 



ar.i on 'he rlgbt hi-nd ^ide of this platform was v. step v.nd t77o 
dccrs, the re'^r ens of tiiece two icors oeiag useJ as ?.n entrance to 
tbs car and Ihss ether ae -xn axlt. The exit iocr -vas not undsr 
the sols control of the conduotor, but could bD c^ned by any one 
dsiiring to alight Trcm the car. On bearding the CbX through 
th; r£u.r of thsae tvc dooro on thg right hand'iide of the C3.r, an 
intending paaaan^er M;culd procsea alon^ a railing, ext^indin-r 
acrocti the platform, uivbil he reacLsd ths left hand aide- of ths 
plat-^orm, -Len such paaien^: r -.vculd t'orn to the right, give his 
fare to the- oonductor cr Alas put it in u box provided cr :hat 
purpose, Kcur.t onr; ste;.' .?.nd go t/rough a door into ■."he oody ox 
tho car. A paatt^^ng&r desiring to alight fror.i this oai- ivould paas 
thro^-Lgh -v door at thi rear of tha r..c.in body of the car, on ths 
other ^-.ide of 'he car fror. the door by which he entered ths main 
body of the car, ".nd, u en cte-pin£,' t'cwn on to tht platform, 
turn to the Isft anc. cither c.o£n the outoiae door himssli' cr have 
ths conductor do it "Tor him and £,c from 'he platfcrm on to a 
step and ihsncs up to ti-s. streot. Wa - i 1 -c — *yri\z bvldyhce- — i-*— r«rt"<ytti-t 9 
c 1 oa.r en - - i -ht a p c i i : t-, ;yl t a'-p^^i'^S^that thic e;<,it door was net 
controlled by any lever at the hand of "hs conductor, but mas 
ocened by % hnndis ctti^chcu to tho door it»eli » Th5 poditAon o£ 
the conductor ordin>arily :,nd at the tiii^o of the accident here 
in ;^ue5tion .'.ad, on Th5 piatforir. oat'.vcsn xha cntranc3 and exit 
door a lea,din£ ':o and rorr. ths bcay of ths car and behind ths rail- 
in[3; r;.3ntioned .abc/e. The 2xit door, ueed in pa.;3in7 from "he p-at- 
forrr. to th'3 street, evr\xi'ig back against the railing vvhen open and, 
as tha space into which an outc^oing pa3,-3 3n:A-£r -:tspped wsvS about 
two fsct aquars it will be aaeo that v/nen saeh an outc:oing passenger 
ste;-p?d into the piatCorin from ths ..ain bocy of the car, hi.5 pro- 
ssnce vould pr.-vant tha clocing of the door, if it was oosn, cr 
its op-ning, if it v/as cloaed, by the ccnl ctor, who .'^ouli under 



such circuirstanoes be standing behind such passenger. / 



Tstnjj :fon e.ew loot d-ixa srfT .t.Ue nr. ajs xsrlJ-o f4^ ■^^'^•^ '^•^'^ ®^* 
sno Y^'S ';cf isrr?-:'© ecf tluoo ;tijcf ,ioi^pii£aac ©iij 'ic loi^noo aloe sd^- 

■,J5 o^J- no ^ffl'^o.'ij^a^q- ,,9it:'f .,,iijQ7;^,.jOa-^ajB^. istiil, lOi .^.K*ii9^ %.Qtoijkfi<^^..&4i 

^„'^d-on ajsw looi ct^ixs axifd- .d'^j^.-Il'^^a^aqc^.e t^^-^rrtq^cr gtri- h ■ no ■ TJi^S o 

,.■3:0 noIiiQoq srlT ♦li^«c^i ocooi) 3a.t oi, aaxlousd-if^ aliixjuixt^^ .^cf ..Jtsnacja* 

-*jEiX<^ ,g4> iaoxl aniaa-sq ai iJStsif ^_zoo.Jb itxs .qs^^ .avode i;«noii-aom^3ai 

^iirw neqo nsriw ^alXi&r ©4:^ ^teniii^x jiojscf ;^i|tmB tdtsoalja -sfijf a^ fflxo.i 

d-ij'ocfi: e£w isqqed-e 'xs^nsee^q ^nxoi^K'tjjo nji 4^^:^^*? -^^^"4 ;®P*9(® ,®''^*, ^■'^ 

'xe:3n96isiiq ^niogd-^ro xua .rloxj.a ijarfw ifj^rf ae^a. ftcf ,^,Jiw .^.t ©xtupe tsd'l owJ- 

-©•iq .Bi4 vi^o i3ri4 ^'i^fl. x^od xii^ -ri. „ajid- rsoxl, jnixol^aXfij' iSJl* oitad tsq .sJ-a 

i^o .,aaqo j9Jaw ,4,4' V^ ^%Qpb fid} io ^2ni8oX,o . e.-'f d-iisv. 15 bXx/ow, aonsa 

■xebnu Lix/ovv orlw ,xoi}"0';fcnoo j-ri- y^-' tibssolD e^w 1 1 It ^gninsco si-1 



frT= y r c, 1 ]. a r.4 ■ b e c an-; s a passenger on this car about six c'olcok on 
ths -venin^ in qu-?3tion. It 'vas after dark and the lights in ths 
car en the street and i.-: the etcr3e alor,^- -.hs street, vere lirthtsd. M 
the car asarei S'bcond Avenue, j, p g llant - rr eased a push button, 
thereby notifying ths conductor that sh^ ieairsd to Isav? the 
car at t lat point, and he tr- .airii ttsd this signal to "he i.ic bor^ftle*^"'^' 
A ;y jlla ^yt- then left her asat, '.vent ir'Trough '-he exit 3oor ani stooped 
dcra on to th-:? plat-i'cr-oi. Tha uniiaputsi evi'i.ance ^hjws chat hen 
she aid this, the outeii'e iocr vaa closed. 'Thils a'ne ,va= standing 
tbere and juot aa tha car rsach'Jd S-JcyAid Avenue, its apsad being 
slaoksned. tr-vo :nen carrie oat of th£ body of -he car, pu hed by 
ths ^ii'v - j 's l -jyarftA, o:-3nad the exit door ani stepped io'vn onto th-:; 



)r callea out a -varniriK to:^Gollan<i -^ 



strs-it. At that tiws the condi,jjto.r caziea oux a -varning toa^ 
'"".it :ih5 ■-xamil sh.ould '-rait until ths car 3!:o:-i:;id b'sfcra alighting, 
out --ihe either iid net hear hirr or paid no al'tention to hirn, and 
passed out dirsctly after ths t-?vo T;en, stf»p'oin.r off o" "''h'; -tep 
and fa].lin<^ on to the jtr^st. 



».^»af3~J94^-jie4--«p*'^^rH?h«-'-«^n - 

hoj<w» r It ia. apparent 'rosr. the evidence and from a plat of the back 
platiorm of thi5 car, ir.troducsd in svilsrcs, that aa 3*$W5-ii!«it ' ^ 
stood on this plat 'orrr. after ■ :i door had b^en opened by ':he t-./o 
men in question, her presence prevented tht conductor from clo^-'ing 
.^ exit door, and that her departure from th: oar was ^3o auJlen 
at th'; oonductcr had no opportunity to do anythin!^,' to prevent 
her from leavin..--^ the car, except to caJl out a warninf^ to her, 
T ae Jldi Ap p c 1 L ! tr. t ' adra i tjyj. n her testimony that when 3he left 
-. r .jeat, after glvin;^ tlie signal to atop, 3hc £.ne;7 the car 
rf 3 1 i :. 1 in mo 1 1 on^ a w^d .. it . g n omo 5lga r"~tv~Ttsr''t'h:g.1r an' "ordi nar ily 
intallig'5nt. person, in he exercise of due care for his c?m safety 
, could ea.^ily judg«by the street and atore lighte, vhether or 
not ohe car v;,.a in motion. Jt is apparent to \is tTiat, after the 
two i-'.en left the car, appellant followed without taking hold of 



T 



no alooXo'o xie iuods Xfio Bldi ao ti&gnsa^q & #«ub o^ci ■ - ^ - f tjil I <» g eA ^^ 
,xtqJ-c1-uo' d^isq, £ beBsBiq ■4^i!S-i^r'»'^^i^ ^9um\'k bnoQeB, .iisi&^a 2(B0 ©rid- 

r- 

rf8f> *jrn.i awcrie eoxisfclve fc©#£;qtJ:tnif erfT .<caol^tj&Iq S!:.t ot' no nwcxt 

gnistf teeqe e^i .ejJitevA b«ooe8 t9xfo#©^,t!i, a^© .i^iid' e^ *ei/(, -tcrij sTarfrf^ 

. ■ '■ - ^,^^ ^^ ^ __ j,^ 

. odi o^jto ifV'Oi? fceqq:».*B :JbCiii- 100.& *ix© sri? J&ftaeoo, ^!Uhi*a:»«^. end- 

qQ^ i ssi;:* J.IQ "iXo^ ^^^iqqs;J■.8 tPerr: C>w.t bsH 's&i'ia xlto^xt^ ^s-'O ba^e^q 









' j-gp a X. 'i^ke a^ cfisilj ,,S)o.asJbxvQ al b^osjbo'i&cil, <X60 eXrf.}-- lo ajiold-^q 
^rtiaoXo moi^ xotfoifLnpo sdi X>sd-xtsveiq ©oa®^©^:^ 'Is^rf ^noX^^iJ^esup at nsm 
*n&v©iq .od^ jjaixLtY^s , pi) 0.+ ^d- cxiju * ocoqqo p>a i;j8ri;,i;Q#DJj.tiap; 

£9 ©iii w^nsa 94s »qo.iJ"H o.t Xjen'^x* ©xL-f gaivig .rterf^ljSi, ,«*#©« i&ri 

yXi--rr«ntf7Ta'^fS»-t7Jtrt- EJJ* t3^"-TrJ3«'Xcr''»^ ^noi:*,oftj at X-Xid^e 8£vr 

Y*6u.,6S ; o 3eiD:i:©x6 t|\ oai6q^,;^aeaiXXQd-fli 

sl-saiE^s ;■ ^, ^XXs^© tiuo: , 

Sdi "xedi.:: . • .i&TtJBqc,; .nOxjOm ai. e .r IJEO ©fiJ Jsja 



afty— i »- l i G r^il oT- x^^Y^n^ — arfty--3rtrtOTlrlT5n'"r6"'wlletT^^ ox not - -^he oar 



oil© car to tlie plE/tforiii, tne exit 



;s:'ped Ic-fm fro.f tha rrain oody 
:;or vvad oloasd and tasrs -44 



n'thint; ir the evidsnoe tc ahow that the conductor knew^ or ahould 
hav£ kiiorfn, tti^t any ons othsr than .*-.-^«-5r±3Trt iatsndei. to l?avo 
th= oar at this point. I ^ ic o vid c ut t hat -- th o o ondu-ytoT— ^iray^ied 
ap oii-iiant as._a e-Qn. as hs disooys.r,^,d that ta« enr^d-oor Wcia o^en, 
^•"■^ _!l;i ^ /-j^- i^-iiaa-t ii.ppg Liaja-t--*-i-iFt— net hear nfs '"warning or p^ \± no 
attsatofiii iiii.1- uot ae aonjiaersd nsgirgSn&'er on his --.-art, 'itneasss 
for ir-^^wriria 6 , not oonr.30t3d in any .7ay with xns ccmpany, ueard 



the 



.t the csr -TTaa rnovinc, a^. the 



hs jonduator'tt warning ana kne/^ that ^ 
tiiflai jU--a»iJp^iis«..-say3-_in„iJ:s.Ji-:^iaf-.*,, AjL-a;;^^ not. liiar, . 

ths conductor'^ ^^^ning, it -waa 3ithsr becaus^e hsr earing rraa 
not a3 good a ^ t.iat oi^nuniarous ot^r persons on the car or 
bee iUd© 3hd was not :;'ayin^-^ atteyrxion co her surrcuiidi.igs. In ths 



/ 



iatwc:' oass, sae «aa n3siigsn-|>^in t1 

/ \ 

waa not neali^-i^nti / \, 



^.e ror.iiar oas3-3, the cone ec tor 



X 



We do not find any iVidence in thX^r cord that v?ould juiitify 
U3 in holding cna-c ths ao?3ll85 was negli'^nt in its o^-eration 

X. 

of this tjbrest car, \mi~& v,here is corx3iisrab>€ evidencs '^c ^hcw 
that a.:. 'Sj.lant was nsglissnt. The ^.udgment is t::3r3fors afrir^rad, 

Aff^raTiSd. 






JbXi/offs 10 tWeciaf zotouhnop f»di i^tii woile oif aoxieJbi. - A^ilffocn 

©vrsl o& b^hcisial TTTsirS.-^t^^>j&. asnt xedto @ao \a*- .. , rwoni svjgxf 

eri* »J5 snivoRT ei?w ico srid ^^'^ij wsnil ijnjs anl£ii£w_ a'Trofci/.tnoo srIJ 

■ . .- .:■;" - .v.. -. ■ ^: - - / — ': '- \ 

%£r gnlTES' isri s©jLrji??>©cf tsrirf-ls ©jbw d-i »3ninT*^ b^totoutaoo silt 

to tiso aiit no anoe'jcaq •x^ii.to uiSQistmaJ^ tj^ii- e £ too:? B£ d"OXi 

erii fil .asriii-aJUOTiJje tQd oi £iots%p:^ff r^niyjeq *on exv aeir/'ostf 

'^^iJex-fi; Jbljjow iadi Jbiooi : - ■^ojb £>ai:'i don 

worfs o* ^orisfciiva sldjs'rsfclanoo si sisxlcr sixriw" ,a«o ff.. . lo 

^tB■ lole^Sfftf ei: d-nsmgX;!?^ axlT , tfTfesiXserr asw *n£li sfjidd- 

• Isam'iil'iA 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) ^ 

SECOND DISTRICT. l' ^^" I, Chpjstopher C. Duffy, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in aud for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand ;ind affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this^ 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



'^**t:.^ 



^':? 



\ 

AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT,' 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand: nine hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois; 
Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice. 
Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justice, 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk.^ Q Q T.Ae X 1 #0 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 



^ ^ /5^_ dj.'T' (affQ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit:' on 

the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ares 
following, to-wit: 












no ': ;1 iw-o^ , ab'; 
a.i: belrl rjjsw j-auoD /©r{.t ^o - 



Gen. No. S147. 

James M. Swan, Dsft. in error » 

V5 Error to Kendall. 

Willia.-r K. Loorocu.rrcvv, Pit", in error. 
Dibe^l, P. J. 

SwaiB :usi Lpofbourrow in tho circuit court of .K'endall County 

and ?il3d a declaration and h";,d a suirimoni icsusd. to ths ohjriff 

\ 

'.Thich 'vas returned "ssrved, and on Ootooer 33, 1914, at rhs October 
Terx. liad a default arid a judgment for f:67£.71. On !-]ov2ir.b:-r S, 
1914, at 6aid t^rtr., tks defendant appeared by attcrnsy -xr.d entered 
a motion to aet a.ide th'^ default. On ■Jaroir. &, 1915, ctiil at taid 
October TsriE, ae entsrsd li+3 cction to -.rithdra?? ths .r.ction to set 
aaiae the dsi'ault and thi£ ^^^tter irxtion -.vas grantsd. He says that 
he af terv/ards, on ::;;arch 15, 13«^£, at baid Octcbsz Tsrm, anl-ered 
ancthsr .r.ction to cat aaids said, default on axf idavit, and that 
motion was denied. He thereupon olDtainsd a dill of sxoectiona 
concsrnina,- scia crctiona and now ciXjsccutss a writ of srror from 
the order rsSxiaiii'- to vajaxe ths derault. 

The bill of 3xc3;:t:or.5 ^o3 3 not sik)?; upon -.vhat 'ground the 
first .motion ^ra^ baaed. It cb'/icuely '^as\nev3r hsara but -vas •.■with- 
drawn. The second mcticu, assu^r-inj one wasv n^.ads, aa to "vhi:!h th; 
., iil of exceptions is siisnt, 'vas basad u dr. an affidavit af :r.sri- 
tor4rd^±e — i^r4ra^&*e. IThc declaration was u:on frvo notea for di'fjrent 
au.T6, one deaoribed in ths first count and ths o^hor in thp nsoond 
count of ths declaration. The affidavit ^'relatsd to "this note" 
v.'ithout shcwinp 'vhether the first or isccnd note declared on -vaa 
.•:;eaat and it alleged that that note '.vas i/iivfen in compliance •.vitgi 
a contract for ths exchange of landa. It aid not state '.vith -vhom 
thia contract '^as aiade nor any of ths terma of t'le contract. 
It dtated that JaUies II. 3-mn did not comply v.iith his part cf the 
contract, and oecause of his failure to do sc LccfbourroT had not 
recei'vsd s,ny oonaiieration ''for th-c abcv5 rsnt lcn:-d note," and 



t^- 



^j-r'iroO IXiibrtsX 1o *:!:uoo j-i:jjoiio grit nl wo 111/00^0 9^1! Jbsi/c- a£wS 

^ / 

aetfoiJoC srf:*- i'.e ,i>X5I «8S tscfoJ-oO no £)np ^JfcavisV XjerrTL'jfai «£w riolrfw 

btsi i£. iLl&s ,3161 ^^ iozsVi xiO .JlJJjel-eb jsrid- ©Jbie^ tee oj nox^ca jb 

/ 
i5& OJ aol^'tm erf-"- w^iidtxrv o;^ noxd-oa_ e^rf ceiscfns .^^xl .aii^T, isoo^.oO 

*xrid ©'{jee sH .SactxLet-^ ex.7.' aoltoai r&tij^i airit bnjE 4"XjJ>e'ieL stii ejuie£ 

Jbsiadae .fflisT lecfoitoO bLsa i£. -^cxix ,3X rioijsJi no ^abis^'itsils: srf 

j£fj;t i:n/- ^ifxvjsti^iB no d-Xif-s!l:3t /x^e eX;Xer *sa oi noid-o.Ti isiIJ-oxije 

e£!Ox;Jq^cxf 'io XXitf >e irsaijetdo noquaisxid- sH .tsixisX. aew noXd-oa 

3501'- 10118 lo J-Xiw .£ 8SJt-0O£«c;iq wofl Jsnje aaoiJ'orB JbXca jaXniscaoo 

tiLsj£ri3b sdo' elijoxv o;t ^nXeulsi leJbio adf 

^dt tauor-^ t'Qdv: npqjj waaa d^on eso6 snoX^qo 0x5 lo XI lo erlT 

-rfrf-Xw a£TP tiffi bisad isvan/6£w ijjiBuoXvd'o fl iJfcaajscf *£w noxc^oai, i^eiXi 

edd- ricir> od" e^ ,»Jb£n!ytX5W sno gnXaujesjB ^JSoid^om Jbnooss sxiT tfiw£iX: 

"l^z^s: ":o Jxv£Jbi^'i£ ae nt -jj bt>6&di a^r ,*neXxQ eX tnottuaoxs lo L116 

tadielrXX; 'io. eeion ovr? nocx' s^w xioXd-JBi^Xosi' srH/»» ft«oloX ojjoX ioj- 



Jbnooss "'lit nt isdto e.i.:f inr. ;tm/oo Jeiil sxlt ai J&©o'Xioe9Xi sno ,t»Tjje 

"sd-ori etdi" ot i)s*isXsi| ;^ivx.jbXlljs sr:T ,noXi'£iJBXo8fc edi !to diwoo 

»£r no iaix-Xoet ©*on brroosa io ;fsiX^ sill isrl^sxiw gnlvforis tx/ofii-Xw 

^j-ir/ ©on^iXqrKOo nX nsvXji sxw s^-on d'jBr.;^ t^di tegsXXJS *X X>n*- ^A^sm 

.tioxiv fl'Jfv.- stjcd-e i'on LtZ d"! .sLxizX lo ©snjaxlox© and lol *OJsid-noc. £ 

.tc^id-nco 9:+ lo &ffli?d" srii- lo Ynjs ion ebjecc a^w j-o*idnoo eXrf* 

arfi io i-xjBq aXrf rid-jiw -^Xqaoo don LXi^ n*v,'8 .M a?a»L Jjeiid tsd-js^Xj *! 

d'on t£d woiiwooTSooJ OB ci jt 4ii;XX^.'i aXxf lo oou/icsJ tn& .d'cx^idnoc 



that he denies that he is indsbted to S-.van in any a'nount. The 
affidavit did not ahow .rh-^t Swan v'as rscuirsd to do by the con- 
tract nor ir. what r-epect he failed to comply thsre-.vith. It 
statsd only the leral cor.clujlcn of the af.'i3.nt and no facts by 
which the court coulJ dsterxine '.yh'ther hie cor.clugion wac- -A'ell 
founded or not. Thie aiffdavit isi entirely insu-' 'icient to show 
tnat he ha,d any defsnes to either note and it practically adniita 
that he has no iefense to one c: the notes. The lacta should 
have Deen stated so that the court could determine .vhether he nad 
j any :)-£fenss. The affidavit ^urther i-.id t::at Swan was indeotsd to 
^1 the affiant in the sum of iiCCC but it aid not say he.-, t::^ iaisb- 
tednesB arose not what tiie faota are, and it stated cut a con- 



1 



' elusion and id insuf 'icient . ^'oreover, as a general rule, a 
, -.efault -,7111 not oe vacated n'.-,! ely tc let in a eit cff , i'or '-he 
defendant has a perlsct re.^edy by oringing suit against the plain- 
tiff upon auch set off. The coui t j^icnct err ir. denying a rrction 
to set aside the ^Bxiuxix default. 

In this court Lccfbourro'.v ciainis that there is ". defect in 
-he return of ^:he ahsriff Uj.on ';he £UjTi.Ton&, 2o far --.^ a;,::'-aTS from 
he bill of exceptions this point was never n-ade in the court 
^ilo.v. By the inotione above r..cited he entered a full a 'os?.rancs 
in the case, and 'le cannot oe heard in thi» court co urg? a reason 
/or vacating the zsszss deiault vvhich he did not present to the 
.ourt below. 

T'ae order is therefor? affirmed. 



'^> 



-HOC erLt Yd oi: ot £)SiXjjp3i e^w n£n-8 ^aiIt.' woffe Joa htc iivebt1\£ 

Yd B^foii on ba-.e tnjsx'. 5:js srfi ^o noieulonoc Ifl:|?el ©lit v^^o ted-x^e 
lis?: a£W jioleLflonoo airf isrij-sri?; anigjisd-e.b bijjoo j-tuoc eil* rfclriw 
worJs ot ^neioi'i'lwsrri vl6iij-n© ai iiVdBijl^ljB airiT .d^orr lo tsI:njJo"i 

fcli/orfe fiuojsl sriT .as Jon sri+ !o sno 03" eenslsc onr Sijri srf -Jdil;! 

bsd srf isriJ'sriv. «»nimi9cfs£ tXifoc liyoo sct« Jjerft oa .bstj?*e nssd sverl 

ot Jb8*cf8i:f:l ejsT? rf'fisirS tjen'^J- Jblfs -rarftiut i-jtvfiijxllis exIT .aensj:si> Yfl^ 

*tfstnl eril -nod Y*e 'J'on fcxt ti tu'<{ OOOS'i lo £O0& srl* at ia^lllA mdi 

-noo £ tJJd tsti-te i-i Jbnjs «»tj3 e;toje'i 9rlc^ t^aw Ion esous «aenl)?tf 

e ,8lJJ'r X£a?ns:!i 3 &£ jievos-xoM . tneloilljjani tsx ta£ noisulo 

arf-^ to':; <iio tie & at taX oi^ Y-^s^s^'fi i©«t^c£v sd ton XXi* tXi/jsiaZ) 

-atsLq 3rit tani^'Si? txaa girigaiacf y^^ y^s*"^^ toa'iidci js ejaif tnacneTei 

1102*0.7! s -^cit-^nQh c.L tis ioabtb .t^i/oc sriT .aIo tsa rfoifs iiocu lilt 

.tl0^1si) xdtiMlJsaie arlt si>ie.s t9s ot 

rti toSiSii c at. sisilt tir:^ ' sicix-.Io /^oiiiJOcflooJ tiuoo eiift n" 

mo-i5: 87j?oqcj5 e;i IjsI o3 .aiiO'fiiniJa Sift ffoqa "fiiisrls srft la nnut^-i snj 

:f7uoo srft n2 al>£.!c tsvsa sbw tnioc^ 6tAs anditq^oxs Iro XXlcT' eri;t 

aoffJST£Qq-£ Xli/l ^ f)9istns sJ JbatXosi ©vodjc anoi torn erf:; vff .woXscf 

aos£Br £ 5giu o;^ t'ljjoc exrft ni Jbi^srf so torrajeo ari i>«jr ,8e£o arft nX 

adf ot tnsce-rq ton JbxJb srf rfoirfw tiu^lsb smxzMk -srft gfli**^-""^ i'^'- 

«W0X»C!' tl0OC 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, I 

SECOND DISTRICT. i" ^^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper oi the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of I'ecord in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this . 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



iji. :i^- 1.'- ;i-f-ii;; . V rj:!(.i .'> r^'C 






.?)r.tij;\j [>■:>.!■. 



,n> 



7 / 



O If) 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday ,.;: the fifth day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, |'residing Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, fust ice. 

Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS , |Jus t i ce . 

I 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFYi Clerk. n» ^ /-w tt 

I V A A T 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following-, to-wit : 






, lau 



.siti^ul -gn 1 51 891% ,JJSaia TMAE-P.OQ 

, s i + 8x;L , aUAHa ir'l . M MHOL . noE 
, ... , ... ,... ,.- .iisIO -.YTfiUa .0 fl:iH'I0T8iaH0 

' : if :< , % .; « * 



1, I 



n: ball I sBW^ ■ 



Acceal from Peoria. 



Gen. Wo. 6165. 

YJ. D. Chsmical Cc. aipellant. 

Walter T;^:aa, a.;pe:iss. 
Dibsll, P. J. 

Ey a pr\ntei ani written ocntract, ±:*-:.x July 29, 1313 
the ?^. D. C^-.a.Tnical Company sold ana Talti-^' ":" . T-^el ccught 6,0C0 
pounds of hog and cattle powders for f: J.OO. On June 18, 1914 
aaid company 3ued Teel in the "'eori-. circuit court u.-^on sail cont- 
ract for the payment of said C- -m> -rx r . d filci." .. dfc;Ula: '- j.liori-4 HB~- 
assumpgit upon the 'b^jntract 1th the ccrr Tion.-a^untc -.idded, and Tesl 
pleaded the gsncral icsuiSw^nd ccrtain^,.«5s2ial pleas. On a jury 
trial, at the close of all T'^j^^^'^Jroof s, the court instructed the 
jury to find a verdi'ct f orX^sf enJ^5?Qt , and such avsrdict ■.•r:.3 re- 
turned, a inotion/'for/'i re.-,, trial was a^nisd, and dsfcndant had 
jus£r:!,:nt, from'whi^h plaintiff prosecutes This aoceal. 

It a peared from plaintiff's proofs upon the trial that 
-fendant, at the saxne tirr.s that he signed the contract in question 
...30 aigned an:' delivered to the company his promi>^-5ory note for 
o30, the price of said ;r.eiioins3, and that there'-u'tsr and before 
this suit was brought, th3 company ecld and a.-isigned said note to 
one R* F. Zehr and •.■hen this suit was brought en June IS, 1S14, 
Zehr was still the ovmer of said notSjJ It ii a recognized rule 
of law that thenJakinX of "hs note of the debtor for a prs-existinfj 
debt is not p.^ynient, unlV a it ia sxprs/sly agreed to tal:e ths note 
as payr,i-3nt, or unless the cVeditor p^ts v.ith the note or is guilty 
of laches in its cresehtation \or/paym?;?:t , This wa3 hsld in To'osy 

V Barber, 5 J^hns, 63. This v^.a^ \u4tsd .ith a-proval in Cheltenham 
Stone and Gra/il Co. v Gite/J Iron wb^rks, 134 111. 633. This rule 

--.3 recognized and applie'd by this cou'i«<t in Hercules Iron "^^orks 

V Hurmer, 49 111. App^5e3. On vrinzjipls i^t ^^uat be that ^Jhen 
plaintiff sold and assigned this noteia, it dil.not retain a 



.aSXa ,oV, .neO 
,tii£.'i . oO l£oJt.T.:x-;0 .a ,T, 



:tISX ,3X sntfL flO .OO.Ccif lol sta&woq aXJd-fio fcnjs gorf lo etnx/oq 
-sfnoo fcijea aoru t-xisoo iluotlo aIxq^'^. srict nX XsaT £)SJja if^£^«o^ Lijse 

\:'XJJ(; J£ ffC .ejjGlq X6io9r^v4iJ:iJ*T[SO Jfcrti^^^afljaei X^ttsn&g sfl^ ist^eXq 
sn\^ .b9*ou-3:;teaJ: ^luoo £fi\t ,B1■oo^?^^A^f<r XIjb 1^ saoXo s.'.: ' i-z ,i£zit 

• X^acfqj.' eidSf^ a ad'«09eoT:q ^lX;tal.eXq rfb^idvr aiorl » i.-i n.^au ^ 
tjEilo XjsXiif srl' aoqu s'iooaq a*!i:1.i*ni£Xq raoi'i taiiJsq £ *I 
noL&ssup nX tosiitaoo sffri- ib-engXa ad &£d^ gmX* sat^s eri^ ;t£ td-iUBJbrxsisX 
lol e^foff Y^oasicjoaq a id Yai^qaioo sxli- ot teisviXc- .--- 

»£-l9X ,3X ©fiuX, no j-rfst/oicf a^v-- d-^us aXrfd- rcerlw Xcta iJti'eS . . .no 

:<^ni teixs-STq i3 ao![ lOctcfeK ©rfj- lo s^fon ed' !to ^nXifiWt siii- isrlt W£X lo 

, ;.. ai TO e*on srft rfcfi To^txi;^.?^ srit aesXniJ io ,4'rismvJBq e* 

- •cT ni iiX?rf e£W aXcT . v-xo'/xioJt*jB;frf9e©iq a^X aX aeriojsX 1o 

i£V0iqj5' d :"-■"" ■ \Z c ,-rstfiJ53 v 

•.3 .XII *£X ,e-axd»" St.. v .uO Xwv^iO Jbnx enod-S 



rriiq no .^c^>,qqA .XXI 6^ 



cauas oiaction against defendant for ^he purchase price of ■^he rr.er- 
:han;ii3e, and if that position oould be '.maintained, ths vendee of 
"he ?^cod3 could be subjected at the aams tiire to two actions by 
iiifsrgnt peraons to rsoover the sanie debt. '?!e hold that when plain 
tiff sold and transferred this note to Zehr, it did not retain a 
jauae cf action against Teal for the rrierohandise. T;-at note was 
outatanding itn the hands of Zehr 7;hen this auit was begun and 
therefore plaintiff then had no cause of action tc r^covsr for "the 
^.elling price of the goods, and the court properly iirected a 
/eriict. Mcr30V3r the president and the general 'nanager of the 
claintiff testified that the company took this note as payment 
.."or said goods, and this was not disputed in any v7ay, and this 

appears to bring this case within the other branch of the rule" 

"•-'-. " -• .. "-^ y i;-ay Lij.-'iC ou .icUaJ. bu,- :!.av ;i..vy aydtained 
above stated. 

Zehr sued Tsel upon this note and upon another note in the 

■ -'-'^ ^ - •- - ■■■- ■': '-- ':■■ .-: :'VU.it.v .. '.urt 

jounty court of P&cria County, and that suit was pending and on trial 



v.'hen this suit was begun. In that suit Tsel pleaded the general is- 
sue and that the signature to the note was not his 'signature and 
another special plea. On that trial Te il had a veriici as to'this 
note, finding no cause of action. Appellant here assumes ' that that 
was a finding that the signature to ths note was a forg-rry and *fiefe- 
-ore argues here that as that note was a forgery, the original' cause 
jof action remained in plaintiff. There is no evidence hers taat the 
'jury in the Zehr case found that this note was a forgery and hence 
the argument on that subject is not well founded. If the only 
issue had been whether the note was a forgery, there would be :^crce 
in plaintiff's argxinient, but Teel also pleaded the general insue to 
Zehr' a declaration upon this note. Under that plea he oouli have 
proved paymsnt. It a pc- -ir-ei^^e-that Tsel only received 3,00C 
pounds of the G,000 pounds which he purchased. If ht proved that 
Zehr was a purchaser o: the note after maturity, he could hive 



-lem srf? to eoi-^q ssjenoiuq srft zol ^astaBle'b iaat^-^i noitc^lo sb'jjjso 

^0 asbnsv sift ,i)9nijB*nJt£nj ©o' ijXyoo ~no'i*i:eoq tfirf*' 1:1 %a£, ^&eib^£^(c 

Yd sfloitois ov,\+ o:^' emi^ em.c.6 sxf* d-js l)stostcfi/8 stf bluoo eJbooj' an'-' 

nx£lq asrlw d-jarii- blon 3?.' .rf'dsv siTr^e .sn.+ levoosrr' o*' arideieq" uns"isl"m> 

£ ai£;j-$T ion bib ii ,:trisS oJ- s.ton &ifl* JbsaislBiieiJ- Jbhe tXoi 

Jbrrs nw^etf ej?«r- *X08* siff^^ rrsilw lrf$S lo &bciB'd Bcit ai -^hihas'&ei-^-.. 

■. . .. . ■ • - . ■ -^ ' . 

-■■''•£ fcstceiifc YlisqOTq S-ii/Oo ^]g|.'|)fl:.8' tSboog'W/iJ Ib'soiaq ^nillsB ' 

tnsftYJEq'SjB Vifott airft 2i<io* ^jn^qmoo S£f^ iJ'^H^ 'Jbsiljtrf^f. . 
3iri.t fsnj*- ^Y^'f ^i^-^ ^^ J6e;fjjqSJ:fc d-dxt bbtbt' 8Hi-"jfcn£ ,ti)Oog Jbi- 

■■-" -'■" -•■'■' ' '■■ ■■■-'■'■■ ■:• >'J-' ■ .cajv::^:- SvOoj:, 

leiij rro fcrxs gnifinsq q^v^ ttuB ihft^ bHJ^ ttiixuoO \&H69'J' 'iol^ii^ . .-oo 

-8l X,8:r3£r5'^ srf* LsfjjBolq i©9T #iuS ^^r^f'&i' ,'ctiifae; :iil;t narfw 

i&as i-iij-^jeiisia" Biff * ore a£W ' '«r-(fdn srfJdi sii/iBfiaJtB si^i i&di Lnsj ws 

aiiit ot ajs foitiev i Jbxsd XseT HtelT:*' tsdi aO .JSsXq Xjelosqe ien';toflJB 

J^rfd- d-jscft esifiuasjB atsrf jfnjsXIsqqA .iTOid-oja to ssijso on gnlijnil ,6d-oa 

3ejj£0 XjsaX^iio sr?;? ,yt?^'X01: jb" l||l«W S*®" '*je^!^ «-s *<e^rf^^ ssi/3ttjs "sio i 

srf* (J-firft STsrf aofrablvs oil el Bt^c''. IcXq ni Jbsniemsx aol^ 

Qoa^rf tnr Y^egio: .£ a jew ft if an stcl- nuo'i eajso Tufe": ;, 

sorro'* 9cf i:.'j:i;ov' en'scit tifispi ^^oa arft rterfi-driifi' nssa Jb^rf sireai 

Oj •ifS'sl lAJie'ffs^'^ Bdt b^biit.. ■ ' iu<i . 

evjsri tiJJOo $fl JBeXq ^jeJ^' tQfcnU-stoa c. 

■/ 
'■> 



: ^or. 





nl 




i: a • irisS^ 




.0 iisvois 


< 


t nifoq 


-dSJErfCl^C, 


utsS 



ahc-.vn a complete failure of ccneidsration by shelving th?.t the 
msrchandise was v/crthless or was net --'hat it was represent 3d to vS 
and that lie ascertained th.at fact and delivarsd or offered it back 
to the GCtnpany. Tie could have proved other dei'sness under 'ha 
general issue. No proof was introduced fro.T. vhich the jury could 
know Wiiat particuli,r d.-^iense it v/as which was sustainsd in the 
county court is to ±t this nots. Therefore thnrs is no proof hsre 

i.at this note nz.^ iound to be a for.f-';ry./ The proof in this c:..se 
is that Tcel did j*^ sign ths note. The fact that he filsd a -plsa 
'hat it was not his signature does not nvahe it a for/sry. Even 
if Tiel testified on ths trial o: the Zehr caae that his name to 
' h.i,t note Tjr^s not his signature and rot by hiG authority, still 

..srs may have bs3n many other -.Titnesses to prove that it v/aa his 
signature, and the jury rray have so found but -may have abstained 
J sorr.e other defense presented by hiin. Plaintiff after a fashion sought 
to inquire of two '.vltnesses v.hat Teel ts-tified in the county court 
as to the validity or invalidity of this note, but he did not "-ake 
....jy cxiTer to show what he expected the answer to be, as repuircd 
,, the rule laii down in Ittner Brief Company v Ashby, 198 111. 533 

,:ia Court of Honor v Dinger, 133 111. A-p, 406, and if '-hat rule 

=; iiiOdified by hat is said in Hartnstt v Boston Store, 3S5 111. 331, 
yat any answer that could have been ir.ade to these quest icna, un- 
accompanied by any proof of -.vhat other -.vitnessea tsstifisd in 
t.:e Zehr caaa on that subjsct, \7oy.ld not have been ri:.at.:rial here, 
where the question if .T.aterial at all, was on vhat ground was Zehr 
defeated in the suit on this note, and that is not iisclosed at all 
by the proofs. 

Ths judginent is therefore affirrr-id. 
Nie.aaua, J. took no rart. 



sgf o;t tetnsssiQS-i «s«f ti: tmi'^ torr a£W lo «esXrfd-aow aew eeiJcn^rloisai 
jfcjBcf ti teaeli^o to fcsieviXeii ^fx.;y :tO£l #j?rid bBat^t rsoa£ art ^srld- trijB 

erfi- fiJ: Jbsni^d-er - i; (jartelsfc i^Luoiiy 

^r-^:i loo*rq on el Q'X£^i &iQliXi>uX ^stga aidi tt Qi a± i-iijo^ \i;t*iWOC 
esjio eirf.t ni looiq srfT X.^i&giol e scf o* £»iij;/ol a£w ©i'on 

nav3 .^765io:f Jtj it 9i.o.-K d-oo: asoi) eiii-JjsngiB aid io' .-."i- 

ort- smj$n sirf ^jsrfit 9a«& •rrI$S sa'i- Iq L&l%i sdd' iio fisiiiJaiS- i 

Xlite ,tiJ»'3:orij-i;£ Giri tC" J^o^t Jbii£ siwd-^ngia airi *oii e,sw 9toa ^^...^ 
eld afivr #1: tJS:C^t 9VQt(i Qt aesssn^txw isrUo ^aem assd svjsrf ij^o- 

td'ssJOB ttoidQSil B tSaMje llij-nl^iiX^ ,mid ^cf t'SiJ-neastq sane' o exoe 

ixisoo xinuoo rn'r nl bQitii:c--ii- Lb-' asaesni-iw ow^f lie exAjjpnX o:t 

882 .XXI 8«X ^^iCii^A V isa^iM nX avoh tXjaX siijx 

©Xwi i'^r:-' aX Jbajs ,dOi ^q A .X-.I i,feX ^lagxria V tonoH 1:o *ijjOv Xxu 
,X££ .XXr 23S ,sio*S np*8oSr V *d'®ii*5£K aX fcX^s aX tx 

-xw ,iixol*ssj;xp ©serf;?- o& aXjJSis nssd av^arf X^Xuo;: ic\ 

at tdXJ-lies-i e6e-2 9,n;J'Xv,' tarfcfo tverf?? lo looiq i. . . .i;.a-.Cj£000« 

^rfeS e^tw liiufotg J.i tX*^ il:s Xj^JtisifjBni ^X floX^fc 

XXje jf43 k^&olos^lt ion £i J*;.'.v ta^ *©don ;' ' .. ^ .,i.v 



tttaq or- 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. I I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFPY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in aud for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing- is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my band and affix the 
seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this _ _ _ 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



1.-. •!■ 





/ 

AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, ^ 

I 

Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth day of October, 

I 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hu,ridred and fifteen, 

within and for the Second District of thefState of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Pres id in^ Jus t i ce . 

Hon. DUANE J, CARNES , Justice.! 

f 
Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justicef' 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. j'_ 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. | ^ U U -1 o :' ■ Q 



I 





f 




1 




/ 




/ 


K 


i 


\ 





BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



. . 10 \isb :.. . . . , . , ^ . 

"^x^ bah bstbh'L'fi enfn :.-.=. o.j-i^ sno b'^''','; '"■•■■ "• ' 
illl 1o d;?£;J2 srii- 'tQ -toiYiaiQ bnooe.;-, 

■ ■ , ■: ;oori3i;C ,8UAHaiK .M HHOL .noR- 

-.iialO ,Y-I'?lJa .0 Ha-HIOTSIiiiHO 

.,!■;. I. 1/ 'U ^••'^''- ; ■ .IM-i'edQ ,8IVAd .M'.a 






no i J i w - d- 



XIX 



Gsn. No. S167 

June E. Mills, appellse 

V3 Appeal froiTi fisnderson. 

Vi^xage of Oquawka, a^.'pellant. 
Dibsil, P. J. 

) On Maylo, 1914, tae hasband of June E. Mills occupied a 
part cif fr.e Grahair; Euildinc in tiis Viiiai-e of Oquawka, in 
Hsnaerscn County, as a .uksry. T::£i-e v/aB -i bricic si..l5v,'alk, ten 
or tv.elve fcst ■'.vide, in ircnt of tiiis 'ouij.ding ana at one time 
taer^ had svic^ently oeen a sts,.irv/ay leading from this aids-ralk 
down to a Ciilar unisrnsath, bat its U6e for such a pux cone Iiad 
been a'candonad n'.any years before tne date narted, the ataire had 
been removed, and the opening ai in thai sidewalk, leading to 
th2 Btaira, h^id bsen oovered r/ith the v/ooden acor. On "rhs i-vening 
of ths day in question a ^h-elbarrcw we^ standing on tni& ^voodsn 
door, having, o-^zn left there by ¥i:.li3, is he intendei to use it 
during the night for the purposj© of tra.-s .erring bread to t e 
-'.spot Tor shipment on an early morning train. Betvvesn osvsn and 
3i'^ht o'clock tnat -:vening 6-:vcral persons were sit^ing on that 
wheelbarrow, vshen the -voo.. en boor gave T/ay and they vver© axl 
pi s:;ipitateJ. into thi osllar. Thii svidence shows "rnat June E. 
Mi^ls, 'ho wai one of tuoee thrown into ci)£ cellar, wa« quits 
seriously injured. She ".vai at the tin;e in a delicate conu-ition, 
and about. Uvree wcika later su^fersd a miscarriage. /Sh:' brougnt 
suit a:',ain8t the Viliabge b€caude of her said injur iais aVid unon 
a jury trial rec=-:ived a xerdict ."or i^i,QOQ»jk mbtion ."or \a ns'V 
trial v;i6 overrui-sd^ and piai.atiff had .a iudgrrent for that arr.ount . 
from which the deisndant below avpe-ile, arguing ^.'eVe that afpsllse 
wato guilty of contribdtory negligence, that tl^'i vilx\.?:e was hot 
negli-rent, that the daoi^ea are sxceisivs and that the\jourt 
below erred in its rulin.;;e on ':he evidence and fr^e instructions. 



delXsqq^ .elliid .3 sni/t. 
♦ itoeisijnsH moti l£9qok av 

:CXj3v?sJbiB 6xrf.1 »noil gnijb^sX \ffiWTij2J-s js nsscf \cXtf-neoiv3 Ljerf sxexit 

' bjsrf ail^da atft ,Jbdai£n sd-^sc srij aioiaa' &i^bx xn.3m Jbsnota£d£ nescf 
o* gnxtiisl ,iX£-ffsbxa akAf-d ni iiS aninsco srfd Ln£ «i)9voiii9i ns3cf 

nsjfcoow ej:n# no gnii)np4e enw woiajscfXaexiw jb floxd-asxjp nX v 

ti 9BU oi .fcs£n5d-nX ©ri o.i' ,eXliM ifd aierfJ iJ-'isX xist^o' gnivi;^ ,aw)cL 

©n:t od Isxisic s-^-tiislsn^Td- lo eaoqijuq 9fft to'! drfsin axfit grtXix/Jb 

fcfl£ nsvss neewdsfl .nxj?.id- gnXnaoHi v:X'i£S aa no J-xiSiTiqirfa nol rf-oqeJb 

tsdt CIO gni^dis sisv/ enoeisq Xjsisvae gnifl^vi i-^jiid- iooXo'o Crisis 

XIjE S19W ^8i-r.t brre vaw sv^g ioo0 asLoow add- csriw ,woa"i£cfX©siir 

,S 8ffi;i;, d-^/ti- BWorie eonsLivs sriT .i^XXso ©rid- ©d-nX -,a;t£d-iqXo£iq 

9tiup Bijw ,iJsXi80 srfd O'lnx owo-xrU sson'd lo ©no e-j-»v Oii* ,«XilM 

,noiJfxLn:oo sd-jBoxIeJb j3 .li emid- srfd d£ a^w eriS .j^stiJcnX vjIfe^oXisa 

^tTlgjjQid" ,irfa\ .©gjaXii^offiXm & Jbeie^llua isd-£.X eaJsiw eeiiicJ . d»Jocf£ b:i£. 

ixoou hiCh.9t!irui,nt bine isri io ©siJuiO><d es^aXXiV erid dsxiX^g^ itxi;e 

W3.T A' lo'i tiQltdm ALjOOp,S| lo'i d-pil)is3r jfr^.JbsviaoaT X^i-id ^wl £ 

iRUOMA d-J8dt t^Y d-cro.Y!gi30^ js i3«rf ^IXdnXjeXq Jbnjs /©sIjjti^vo a^w XjsXi^f 

eeXXeqc£ (tjsrfd- eifarf anXi/gijc ,8l. acja* woXscf ^n-ajlineiBX) sifif rioiriw moil 

Jon 'i 'liv V^if if^rf" gSonsgiXgsn ^To^tfiid-noo "io ydXixja «J3W 

•octeXXvs i't.'' no' B^ntiXui 8:fi nx XiSiis woX 



The £Vid-3na^ deafly ahcws that the\woodefi ioor cr beard, cover 
which fell in, a^ the ^Ui-pcrts ■aiidernea\hf it -.vsra rotten and 
had bsen in vU^i aN^cna-iticu fcr a lor^ spies cf tirs. //it leaat 
two ysitrs befcrs this ccoijient, a meir.tsr of the villr.-;^-3 beard put 
t.ie -3nd of his c-ris thrcugh a rctteii hclc in cne cr' '-he planke 
composing this ^«;ocden cover, j^nd in ..•pito of hie Irnov/ledr^e of tfee 
cinditicn oi thia part of the public oidev;alk, hs tsytifiad that 
to his knc/ledge ths pluce hid r.sver bc.:n ra^air3d. ".hile )ie 
wiis on tne Board nor up to th«s time o~' th'- accilsnt. Other vrit- 
nesiiss tc3ti-i3d to iiu sntirs lack oi ^vspairs on this plaos for 
ninstasn ye-irs or lonjar. Ctirtain pi-o^s of timbor -xers adn-iittsd 
in evidence -xv.d i^antifisd by ^t x^a-st ono -Titnress a© being; part 
cf the aupporte of tai^i v;ood3u cc/ar. Thaee uiinb-era ^vers i'ottsn. 

App^rrsorlr-maliTrfi — Um^^-fney 7rsT£--'iTe-t- 13\rrrroryfi'tTy ' 1 3 cntl-fi-sdr- 

aa -i shoul d not -.4taJ.^?--^-&eR---a;dmirtir-3'dy'-1yat~-^^ •• a-- &u•■:^^-i•- 

CLienJLide^Wij■.Lt°.^t-ioft...JL4^lt^ Othor ovidsnce vras introdacsd to 

shov,- that i.)x.&t this -.vcuden portion cf "he -.valk -.".'s-s in a-n unoafe 
coniltlcn i:'or public travsl. The ;,vidence further shcvad th.at the 
City had been nctifiea of the cor.diticn of this "valk by cornplaint 
atgaisiisiMscMt tc the 'layc?: xs.,or president of ~hc villa.?,-3 bo;".u'd 
with a rsquddt f rom- ^affprsl x^a"' that 'fne- .valk or that ::jort'.on of it 
be condemned .ana rsmovcd. Thisi oor-iplaint .vas i-^ncrid, .a^pareatly 
vfithout any inv33ti;--:ation of :;he part of the villags officials. 
Under tne p^rincipioa laid dov.n in Sa^r^viri v City of Aurora, 357 
111. -iOS, the^,jury v/fcie varrantsd in fiadihg from 'fna evidence 
that in this oa&a tha auty vvas laid on the city, not ;nerely cf 
tRSi^aatiss inapect'ion Oi. tha Biasv.-alk, but alao'of in5:;;?cti.ag the 
1 supports underneath t'^je aidsv.'alk to aacer bain Whether cr ."^ot thfjy 

were auf icient. It ia Xviasnt that thi-a waa not foh?^ or ^ven 

\ 
latteriipted. F,a conijiaer ' hi-t the jury vrcre ■.varrantsd in .rinding 

-<C that the evidence shows the \illa3e to have b-^sn .guilty cf neg- 

(ligence, as charged in the aniended declaration. 



< 



\ 

\ 



T9V0C hi&o6 10 100C fl,s»boow/3xi:r i&M awon'e. ^fX^sIo a^rtsSjhrs T^rfT ' • \ 

tas^ n^i^Qx sa©K ti ^^-ssnisisau ai-ioqqixs aifJ^ i^ -^irir Tl^i ifoiilir "i 

Je^el *a\ .8'nlt lo sd4q-i'^fioX js to'^ rfoiilbtiop^js flb>u5 nl n35cf i3£xl / 

s.ff sIi:■■^"' DBiJr.Boo": iijscf ^dsHreri l^jgrl: 'ieW/Iq sifo eg£)'9Xv;oni sM 0^ 

-d-iw i;rf^b .^ns::.tDOii 'srlif io 'STffXj- aii'ci- ot qxj "loxT iji^oS sxlJ- 'rtcr a^w 

•so'h eCstiXq eiii!'-? rt'o JBrtiijqsT iV ^o'SX S'li'd-ils *Ti^' od"- ^ei^Jr^fi&t asa^sx? 

slijenu ft£ al a^v.' ■arX'^w 'srf':^ *ia noittaci" "rtsyboow aX'rio Ixii* ^sai ^loda 

srf:t if^rft XiSwoile idiffaut scxidLlv^ S'iiT' '.-XeTrjsirt o'iXdcrq tWT: "ndJt*x£noc 

:fnlj8Xqaioo x6 iL&i- ajtrl.j lO rtbX^ircridcJ- diiif Ifof'i'SJtljti^oxT ct^d'tf 'JbJrf \i:i:0 

ti Id *^dx.;J■■lcq Jijr/if to jfXi:. 

^tXd-nsi^c^^j; .Jt^tdA^l &«* Jnijsxqxsoo eIrfT .Jbdfvoic&'i 'tnjs"i)Stiffl6tfic 
\ .sXiJ^ol'i'o s^^IXiv sri'H- '2e t^jsq sn':' 16 tXQi.isggtiQs•tni''^a&'^tloait':■ 
soae.i. ive Iff* tfcOTtI: ^iBi^il aX teiJ'hagikjsvir\d«sW^iut,'ii1t ,8ci>-.XXI 
lo Y^eis.^' ;f'd»fe Otitic drft^-.-^d ti^L %£MXiut>'^^siikikt'BtmRi t£di 
srf* aitl^ceceaJt ^0''^«X.r ttttf ^afXjswsfiiS s^^ ■ "Jo i^oiibaqarrX g«±*EfletaKi 
Y^rTrf .tor. 10 •^sfxfsj^v.Nxlvfed-ieoiio/ alljs^atis 6j^#%/£Sni3Jbni/ e;}-ioqri;£ 

j;- ~ i8fc.£entio 9?? .Jbarf'q.Tiscf:^- 



^ 



/ 



It i3 cl?.i;rei that appellee -as Q;uilty of nagli^encc, in 
that her complaint to the n-^ayor regirding the aile-.^alk shc-ved that 
she was cog;nizant cf its coniition arii that, in aitting cr ceing 
on this rotten portion of ''he walk, 3he ':vas net in t'le SKaroiae 
c-7 iue care for har own safsty. It ap-jsars from the ^viisnc© 
tL.at \i-.<: complaint only i-"lat£d to •"O': ^urfase cf '^he ^'sralk ar i 
that 3h£ waa con^plstely ignorant cf the ccniitions existing 
ur.aerneath tliat surface. Ts do not fsel t-.at ths iuty could be 
laid upon her to ascertain the condition o* the su ocrts cf this 
siiewalk ana do net think tbers '.V33 such sviagncs or£33nt = l -o the 
jury that it should aave found a'pelles had such notics of the 
dsxeot that 3hs was guilty of con+ributcry nsgli^snoa. 

Coniplairt is -nade b ap:ellant cf the action c" the court in 
refusing certain inatr-actlons r3qu33t3d by it and a] so in giving 
csr'rain other instructions at th'? request of a-ypcllec, bu": after 
considering all \'r"=, .-^Iven instructions a3 -^ K-criss, 've do not feel 
t;:.^t any oUch srror exists. It is true that certain jiven inatruo- 
tiona cast u;:on the Villacye t"-i3 absoluts duty cf hseeing it? 
sidewalks in repair, wMla a better i;tat3^'ent of the lav; rould 
have b-en tnat ""he iuty cf ths village vrc.-s to use reasonable 
care to i^sp its sidewalks in reasonably safe oon-lticn C-r public 
tra-vcl thereon, but one ir.atructicn riven at "rhe rer.usst of appel- 
1 -nt and- one re'-ueated by it and refused contained the saT;-,s 
atatenf.ent of the law as the inetructione complained of, and 
we do not feel that a'^celiant is entitl.ed to complain cf ths,t 
feature of the gi/en instructions. A~psllant coasplains of the 
refusal of one of it* recueitsd inetructiona, '.vhioh told the jury 
in brief, ':: at if tjsy relieved Trorr the evidence tiiat this por- 
tion of the sidewalk broke because six p-ople were upon it, then 
ther? could be no recovery. \7s do not conaider that this instruc- 
tion was correct aa applied to the facts. These six people vere 
inct piled, one upon tfep of another, on one portion of this 



jfieo TO gnli' + is n/. ,<fj8fff- £)n.£? aoliibttQO Bil I0 tmsin-goo a£w en'a 
asJtonsxs srfd" nt *on asw sriG «2{Xi2\^' arf.t Ttc aotitoq aesioi eirit ,iio ' 

I 
bas afXjBw ©ri.t >o dcs^ni/B sri+ 9* ijai-jsXsi ^Xxio d-nljsXqmoo Tad iedt \ 

atil* lo s:fTon i;e adi 'to rto-fccMtnoc ei"f:^ ixl^tasoe^ o& led cioqu bis:! 
adi o-f teias&erq sonsrivs xloijs a-ew 979cl;t atnlriJ- i^on oi) cnje iX^watXa 
9x1^ lo «oJ:>ton rfoua fc^rf ssXXsqcje Jaru/oi av^d bXuoris Ji ^jb4^, ..i[»u| 1 
.apns:5iXsea Yio^''-'<^i'^'^-^oo to ^f^Xli/j e*w 9£f8 *jBn;J j-oslst* 
rut truoo ecit 10 noito£ srf:t to ^noaXXecqs yd e£>£K si (l-ni^XcrinoO 

tted-lis ?i.'cf ^eeXXeqcB lo #6©up9i ©djf #je enoitox-fT^eni aeriio aisl^so pN 

X0©x i-©n oi sv ,8sxisfi r ejss enoxJoifT^tani nsvi-g sxi^ iX* gniaetianoo 

-ouTdenx r:evlji nl&f'i&o iBd& eitx^ el *I .eteixe toits rfoira ^^^ t£.di ' 

ecM sni«|69:i lo "Z^ub etwXoedjs eo^ ftgfiXXlV srlj- noc^tf *s£C enoii" 

XjXjjov r.f£X sdi lo in3TiBii:.&B lotted « oXlrfw .xi^qs-s nX 2:(X£7;6i>XE 

aXcfjsrrcejBsi 3Qif ocf ej3w eg^IIiv ©dt lio x&ut ©rit Jjsri^t xisad sv/.x^ 

oXXdu-q IvtI nottxtaoo aljtje yXcf^nos^eT ni •3tIj3W9£)Xs sti qssi o:t 8i«.. 

-Xsqq* "io *8Sifp©i sd"* dtjs rrsvXs no^rf-ox/Tteai ono ii/cf «flosi9d;f Xov^-;- 

sro^sS sdt bsnlafnoc Jbaeu^si mx' ti 'jcf bstoQupB'c sno "^n^ i'n-:^ 

Ln^ tlo ijonxislqmoo anox+oi/a^fenx sd-t e^ weX ©d* lo ^tng.te^jEJ-C: 

^jsd.f lo flXjcXqiBOo od- i)©I.+ itfi6 aX iasilsqqji i^di Xssl ion qiy s-\ \ 

©d:' lo aaijelqmoo ^n^XIeqoA .«noi*cuii8ni nsvls 9dj lo siwit^c'- 

\^ai;Q 9dj £>Xoi doxdw .arrotd-ojjiJeni bgissupaa ad-i lo eno lo Xjeex/lsv 

-^oq «Xd.t lexi^J »onsiJi:V3 add- aroi"^ bsvsXXsd Y»d^^lX iedS ,1sXiq' aX 

af^:i1' ,!tt rtogjj -7T.3W sXqor-q xXe ©swaoscf tioid afX^wiXiXsa ^dl 10 noiif 

-ovstarrjt i^if^ i^di leiXaaoo *o<5 oJb 9W..y^-voo91 pa sd tXx;oc! aisdt 

•leYT 9Xq»eq xi» •88dT .C" :iXqq£ S4 ioeiioo ajsw noXi 



I 



-4 



sidswalk, but each vvsr'e standing, or sitting or bsir'g sucported 
by, a d.isti:.ot portion of tja,-^' walk, and the silswalk ought to 'ee 
in auoh u condition that if\ceople stood upon each portion thereof 
tiisy would be supported. 

Como'lfiin-t-lB- -made that-.-the- daffiag&S-awarded-wers excss- 

sive A There aee.r.s to be no qaastion but u#Lat si.tip&ycj»48 was injured 
by her fall. Shs complained oT an injury to lisr arm and rack sna 
she suffered a n^.iscarriage shortly aftsr ths acciasnt. Dhs v/aa 
Uiil&r the care of two physicians for a coneidsrable time 
after th-e accident /and, whils a ppellant cl-^'TvcLa that her miaoar- 
riage was not due to ths accideiit, ^till-the surrounding oircum 
stances, aa shown by the svidenceV are such that '.vs heliev© the 
jury justified in considering it dui^ to the. shock she received. 
In visv.- oi her injuries, v/s dc nbt fesl that the amount awarded 
was so great ;^3 to warrant us/lh disturbing the conclusion ci the 
jury on that point. / \ 

We find no reversible -error in the record^ and the judgment 
i3 therefore affirmsd. 

Aff irmedt 



^ ptf o;t uiisjjo aIl£.Y.-9Jt is erf:^ L.i& »iX,sw fe£t<'^ noxtioq Jo-ixJaijb £ ,^cf / 
Ttoe^Biicf floi^Toq rio£© noqw i>ood"e ©Xqoax^i *£fii Jioii^xcnoo jl; xioue cci 
^, ., i,^«^^ . - --,,-, •, .,; ^, ,ji.-'y''. .fcs+TOQcx/e 5d Jtltfow YeJi* 

i5n^ i«€a tnjE 3ia£ 7Sf/ oj x^^l^l "-a '^o isniciqnioo siiS .XXjai ^eri -X^ 

•£.w sriS .i-nstxoo£ exit is^Ijb yX^^^oae ©s^iiijccBi.tj £ Jbeaeilirfi- erfa 

ai-i* 'o ■•*''^« ©Xo'JStieijrano© £ aol en£icis\;£lq owd- lo aipo 9ii:t letrur 

. mi/oixo ■gcxltciuofiisB siif- 4lti^ ^tn9tioo£ icii oi aut ion ajsw ©s^ii 

/ 
. .i;8vi903i ©lis iooda ©£[.+ o:t ^1; d-i s£[Xisi;lsfioo nl ijaili^aut Y^f^^t 

r 

ik« r-:- .... ^r ,B*--.u* .'./.i- «-;:ci^r.i.'-r '..^ .;fnxoq t£ri+ no ^T0t i 

-; ■ tn9nrgbu\^ &iif btt^. broosi. Qdi al roiis-^QldtazQvn oa tail sW 

■. I sl: '• .1- -■ ?- r!.?: U-, 

-:*',.. t<»' ^ r»T »-■•■' *,: '*»'■:•■" ;•- :■■ 

- '. H :- ^.-Zl: *i'0< -■ - ■ 

..:,;. .Ic wc^ ^- :i ;>jv-^ 

, ; y ;: . i.. ;C:/ 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, I ,, 

SECOND DISTRICT. ( ''^' L CHRISTOPHER 0. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Seeond District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do fiereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Coui't in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand aud affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



^v:il.Mi,|/ Mill 'to -AifiVJ /rrrjQ 



a fid vut 



,,»>"" 



i^J^ 



./ 



<^ -Js. --^ I 



tv- ^^ 1 



/ / / 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fi^th day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice. 
Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justice. 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. 2 I A °^ 



E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff 









rr^, 










Q 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

■j\\) the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
f ol lowing, to-wit : 



,-&cfo;t30 lo ^•'^6 rliti^ erf* jACJeba&uY no ,B«^£;f*0 iis ?! 
tCi'i'si'iil fans beibxrwd snin bnesircrfj ano btoj -jyo ' 
laionLfil '^0 ijJ-sJB sdJ ^o Joi-XTsia bnooeS "i^rit i . - ■. 

.90i.t3yL ,B3.mJ:^j J. 3HAUa .noK 
.9aiJ3j:rC ,8UAHaiK .M KHOL .noH 

, .X^.! 18:18' ,8IVAG .M .3 



J •> \ .--^u \ \ \:r^ s. 



no : .t iw-ot . , abifi'iVTS*' 



Gen. No. 61S1 

Frances laertal, Iie.ft. in error. 

vs Error to LaSalie, 

Charles F. Talter, Pit";, in errcr. 
Di'osll, P. J. 

Fr::.ncea 'i'Vrtel (fcnrsrly Sauter) cue.1 C'/arlea F. ^.Iter 
, to r.:covsr ^350.C0 Vhich 3ae pcid hirr; to ir.d a rs'il s'-tate 
bargain, v:hi3h '.vas rirS«.lly ^sbtoar.uonsd. At the clcise c" -t-he svi- 
ience tl.e court .Urooted\ Ihe iury to return a verdict for lier 
for C i-SG and. oUch a jrc-rdic't. was r-turned, a motion "or a new 

trial '.vas denied ,2Lnd olaintiAf had judgnient, and this v^rit of 

/ \ 

error ia drougi5.t to r^visw that Xiudgmsnt . 



/ W 



Walter lived at Cedar F.-.piua, Iowa, and c\vngd two adjoining 
lots j.nd a dwelling upon ons of tl.sir. in ''sru, Illinois, and 
the aame w:.'.3 in poaciession of 3 t- ir.t, narried Strack, :;nd "7alt=r 
had ths right to tf.rmi ate -^se tenancy by October 1, 1S14, 
Walter had uron &-iid premiass' -. sign that they vvars '~ct sal** 
Frances Sauter A'aa aoout to ./arry J, A. Vlsrtel and desirsd tc 
purchase a plaos. T .s nsr^otiationa «ver ; ail by letter/ .ft-3 — ^ hs - 
CHy.y-^iies^4-©ft--tBr'^fSeth."eT" "t-hs'Tlndi^;^-f-fh«- parties ever 'r.ejr 
ur-oo. ill — ^4*e— t-e-rmsNgf :t v-alld ont r ab t . A 1 1 t h e 1 3 1 1 e r 3 ,-v ere 
preserved md '.vers in evidence, except that ^'alter tsstiuisd to 
sending one letter /fhioh L'rs. IZ-ertel testified she iid not 
receive . I t i a argu s d ■■ i - i^ -^«^'r'%-e^ta.lr#---t4i-ar%- %he^ 

find from 'he evidence t..at no such letter w^a sent. The 
qu^at i^on jwjhsther suoh 91s'. 1^; tax •'jicas 3snt waa - one oi^ -^ao-t— i-^or- the 
jur-y. 'Fh-e- . - ou r t -e^^-d-Ro-t— i^olde— tha-t ■ - <^-9H54ion . Hencr., "vs must 
aSiiunie that iuck a letter wa:, sent or elsd-, the judg^-nent must 
be rivsrsed for failure to ^ubrr.it th .t -r.uestihn to the jury. 
We shall aaaume thaVi^ucli a letter '^vaa sent, fjmjthsr these 



/'I letters constituted r, cosjplete contract was a question to be 
determired by the court. Tellurlde Power T. Co. v Crane Co. 



LilB .oVl .naO 
.T011C at ,il3G jXsiisM asonjeil 

.To'iis ni . j:*I«T tisd-Xi:,?: .1 asIxefiO 
9d-£:f.^s Xjjst £ £>aJ;c' ot .Ttixl M^jsq sric rfoirivJ OO.OaS^ isvoo::i o;} 



led lol d-oli'isv jj itiud-si od xru'i adi y^stosilL ^xuoo srlJ soaeZ 

rsn 5 to" xtoivom £. ,Jb3niui-3T sjbw #Giiji""v b rioi/e bn£ OSS^; lo^ 

"io jMiv? etrif bnB ^inetti-gbul b&ri MiJnljsXq Jbals, belast exw X£iTi- 

-i . d'neaisiijjr/J^rld v;sxv;i ot jfri^gi/oic; ex T:oias 

■ sninioQi)^ ot^* i)snwo Isn^ .jswoI 4ei.'itqsH ijstsO i£ bsvtl to^-XjeW \ 

bns «eioniXiI jiJ'Xis'^!' ni mSilJ- lo tno noo.ij gciiXi&^ij *. baj: ikfol 

teiLsT bcis ,2fO£icl"3 cam^n ^&ar ei c "io noxesaaeoq ni e/:w ©mjse eu'-j 

♦ i'lSX ,X iscfod'oO ycf ^oar.nad" sfst stsa imrdi ot drigii 9ri:f iijerf 

» *X£e to"?' stsw Y^rfj tjsrid- ngie £ -eseimsTq Jbijea no^'^i/ Jb<sri isd^X^W 

od jbsiiaeh tn* Xei-ieM .A ,'l viiix.i ocf d-uocf£ ejEWr TstiJ£,2 BQomnI 

— ^ rfj- fcax vis j- is! YO' XI.s :-i9w snoxct^id-ogan ©ilT .eojBXq £ as^iioiuq 

ai9w 3TSf;t£X s^d- II A .rf^OsTd-iroo fctXjgy- g -lT;^^ttfeai^--»rf4-. XX t; ftg^u 

od- bsXix:f8Sd teJXp.W d-jsrid- d"qsox& .©ortstivs ni siew bas tsvisasi., 

d-on L.CC srfe bst'-liae^f Xed-isM .siM xloirfw is^d'eX sno gnirnsa 

XX*w Mgiw ifTiifo&;/srf#- ^^.ff.t- : %X-4srf*-e'v'^e*f~T^^.&a§xe— * .svidosi 

drfT - .#ff-a-e ej^w n:9d--ifel rfoijfi oa ts-u^ soaabiv^ .gdt^moal ^.•bnil 
9x{:^ ^^i-*€>««?i -*«' '»fl0-e«w ^®ft .ajBW 'isd-d;;^! ^^g^iloye isrid'sfivv nold"e9x.\. 
vfajjai sv ,£onsH . flQii6.3-jijp- 4:jsxij:~-eiJte^JD.---d'-oH--i>XiifOif-^ tu o c— »rfT •^iwi; 
^SiJiK ;fnsn^8i:x;(; snd iseX© io ^nse sjbw 19*.^sX js^ox/e d-jBi:'d- s.nwcfe 
• Yix/t ®^''^ 0* .rj^Oltesxrp t.'^dt tiixidub oi- Qiu£Jii:.i rol bsarsvii e. 

SBarld i8il*9OT^\,dnsB saw i9i-^QL js rfojje/fjsrld- , emutiSjEs Xijrr: 
«o of tto^ssup s 5UBW d-oxiTd-floo 8*eIq{iiroo r. Ls^ijiXd-snoo aas;td-c . 



[J-- 



Msrtel bc'-^an the asgotiationa by .a letter, dated March 
7, 1814, sLdireased to Walter, -.vhersin he told ?'alter ^hat he 
paased by hia place that day r/ith a Triend and sa/.- the sign 
upon it and he thought that frisnd appeared to be a proaperous 
buyer, and he asked Tor lc-7eet price and particulars. Hinder 
date of ilarch 15, 1914, ITalter replied to Msrtel by a letter 
containing the following among o '^her things: 

"I want „ 4500. CO for the whole place, or ^3500.00 
for housc and one lot, the fruit and berries ivre all on 
that one lot, you 33= Mr. Strack and aak him to let you 
show your .nan the house, he has rsnted the place for one 
year, but if I sell he must move bb Oct. Ist. 1914, or if 
your party wants it sooner, I gussa I can arrange that with 
Mr. Stracko 

I will take 1500.00 or all I can get cash dovm and 
baance to 3uJt buyer, at 5 per cent. I ■.'srill .v'-nt 4I25C.OO 
to bind the bargain. I .vill :,ive you ^^50. 00 if you .i:al':e the 
deal. You knc-.v the place, and can tell him all about it^ 
there is hot '.vater, furnace, bath and toilet, sewerage all 
in, cupboards and sinks built in, also china closet j get 
him interested and show him the place, and tlien hs can see 
-/hat there is there, let ate know 7/hat you !ra>.e out as scon 
as poi^sible." 
Under aate of Ivlaroh 18 Msrtel answered in part as fellows: 

Tie finaxly :;ot to see the house i:-vst night and '.ve thought it 
was juat .vhat v/e .ranted, but don't you think you cculi give 
us a little lower price. If vve bought the v/holeplaos and 
paid spot cash ive would like to occupy it by Ji'ay 1st*" 
Walter replied to ilertel \inder date of Ivlarch IS in part as follo"'s: 
"I can't sell it any cheaper than I priced it to you. I 



8rf t£ri-^ -xed-I^W bloi sd nisisriw ^isiL-^li of teeBSitt^ ^i^lQl «V 
n§la srfcf .vije Jba^ bciBtrl js xf*iw v;js!b Vasrij- a'o^Iq airf ycf bsaeaq 

0'0*002£| ao" »©0£iq sibifw s'rf* lol OO.OOSf^"^ rf-n 
no 11^ 61^. eeiitcsd' tn^ S-IjjxI sd# ^tol sao las, aesjo^ 
x/osf *3l od- mirfiai:: £«£ afojsitS .aM ssb x/oy tJoI sno 
ano xol 90£lq ©dd- iisiJ'astt a^rf sd «»ajJori S£f.t nam auo^ worfe 
"11 10 «*'XSX .S-eX .d-oO Cfcf ©voib jfejjm srf IXsa't li ^0Cf ,xesY 
dtlw ijsili agiijEii^ ri£0 X eeajjg I "i^anooa" ti 'eJoflW V^i^q xifox 

bc:£ tvtfob daso *©s' iiijso I XXa 'ib o6.0oS$ sifif xilw""! 

OO.Oesf' ta£:t XXiw I #*flsb isq 5 *£ ,i8^jjcf i-ius o^ aons^c 

si^J- SjC^ffi i;o\f Jl 00,03| uo^' ert-g XXiw I .ttijs^i&<f sdi bald oi 

^tl. fuocSs XIj3 ffiXil XXsJ' fl«o tn^ ,aoJ6XQ Qdi WQn3i woY .X,c3i; 

XxB'9g£asw3a ^JaXioJ' hn£ a^&d ^%0■&3XzsJ'i ,T«#.0if *orf ai . 

*©§ jtssoXo ^niilo oath «fri Hiwof aafnie i5ni eijiBodquo ,ni 

686 fteo ©fl rtsrli X)n£ ,»0£Xq B&f aid woHs i>iX6 Jbad-gQisd-ni mid 

".eXcfXasoq ajs 

rav.oXXol bjb tr&q at iJsiav^enjB Xie^asM 8X doijeM lo 9:^J:f: TsfcnU 
Ji: id-gvodi s^^' i^ruB d-rf^ln *a£X eex/off en'J^ sea o;t rf-og ■^ll&nl 
avig tXwoo i/ov: jfnirid' uox i'aob fijdi .Jbsd-njsw ©w ^£riw *But s-^"'^ 
Jbnj? ao^IqaXoffw ttdt 'tf.rtsjo^' sw Itl .eol^q iswoX oX*;tiX A.Bij 
"♦^aX if£M 'frf-ti yc S3fix" i>Xx;ow ©w da£0 toqe tijeq 

:e7-~iro'^ ^ij itjuc^ nl. 8'X iIci.kV ^o 9*£t laJbru/ lerf'isM o;t LaiXqei is;fi.- 
•ifov o;t rfjt Jbaoii xsofisdo vn^ Al XXea t'riBO I" 



v 



paid ^4,LCC.0O and can't lo^se en it. I icn't kno ■ hather 
Strack v.ill ir.ove or not, he iT.igat ask ac ^uch. I don't care 
about the cash rrioney, I v;ould juat as ooon aave a pocd piece 
of land taat v.ill incrsaae in value." 
Llertsl replied in ,:art as xollows under date of ^'iarch 33: 
I "IncloasJ iiere .ith please f'ind dank draft for C'S-^O.CC to "■:ind 
I "he bargain by Frances G. fauter Tor ■ :e. entire place, truatir^ 

tliia Vvill bs =ati*i-vctcry m\^ ycu .ill roce^d vit'u the 
, proper papers. Kindly take up the nattsr with '.'r. Strack 
v;3 -vould like to occupy by Vay 1st. 1914." 
Salter replisd to 'isrtel as rollows under dc:t3 c:^ i'arch 35: 

"Dear Sir: I have your latter and >ank draft of the 33rd. but 
v/ill not bin J the dais u il I hear from Mr. Straok. If he 
asks toe big a pries to vacate by I'ay lat. -914, I 'vill net 
sell only subject to ' ne terma of his lease, -ivine him until 
Oct. lat. ISl^ to Vr-.c^te. If hi-i price is Tcr- than I car-- 
to pay, n.ay oo xitk you and I can arrange aorr.e sati i-factory 
way to buy the lease. You ..ay let re kno-: -'■'-at ycu think 
about this plan. I -vill h'Srp your na.re in rrlv^-cy at T'es^nt 
and probably I can net hinr, to v;,c-;te at '"■y price. Thsrs is 
I furniture stored upstairs in t-.e house t-at vill h .ve to 
, be left there until fail. The party buyin- the property vill 
also have to buy the v«in..o'.v shades vhich are in rcc:3 condi- 
tion. Tne -rice .vill be ClO.CO ."or the shades. If I can 

( 

arrange .vith 'Ir* Str..^ck I -vill if-.ve tne neceaaary -apers 
( 
I drawn up in.f.eliately . " 

R 'iixl ;yj ubi;tc /- "\r §d that~iy'sA^?-eyH»eT^"imi:Turingga^^ 

He re.:; ireo, tl/at ":.hr. furniture atcrsd u^^taira should be left there 



till fall 



Lat the purchaser mua>- buy\ the lYindov." shades and 



P ^ i y l Q . QO/'thoy o fs c. Yiiss. Sauter then v^Tote TTaltsr in part aa 
follows, undi;r date of jiarch 30: 



9i£0 ^*iicL I .rfojjm oe aCsi: d-rfgim srf ji-on to avcrn IIlw -siofiii-a 
eoalq boon on svsd noos 8£i iaul Mwow I •ys^oi' xieao odi -iuods 

".3ijXx;v ni aajB©ioni lll'n tsdi bciai "io 
tS£ rfoipM l-o sd-jBl) i3£)iuf ewoli^^ as JiJBq nl isiXqc;! IsJisM 
batz. ot OO.OcSl^ lol Jlait afn^sd £iail ssjseXq xl#i>v6:t&ii ij&aoloni" 
■giitauzi ^sofilq erliaa sf-i aol toiu^B .0 aeofljBT"^ ifcf nJt^ga^cf ed 
srfcf a;txr oescot.-! Xliw uox Jbae y^o^o-6'^8-^*-^^ scf Iliw six;. 

.".i'XSX .d-aX x^^>^ \^ ^qisz.00 od- sriiX LXi/ow ©w 

:S£ doajs^ lo &i<Bij isbsus ewoXXol e£ X^.ti^M oi. fceiXqai leifXjsW 

j-jjo' .ti££ sdi to ilstrb ^n^d ba£ reii-sl ijjoy sv-sxf I riia a£c~a" 

exi il .iO£'id'3 .iM moil t-esri I XJ; t, eXjea srfJ- bnlcf (foa XXiw 

loo iiir I .^X2I .3-8X XJS^.XfSi' .©*«o.sv o;f eoiiq ,6 gid 00^ aia£ 

Xl;trab' mirf gnivir, ,38£9l Bid to aaiiai Qiii oi- toeldus ^lao XXee 

-aro I asd& aiom si. eoitrq aXxl ^I .ajf^ox^v o;t i>xex ,;taX .d-oO 

ialdi uox fs^v wotU ©Jrt d-sX y-S'I" J^oY .sa-aaX srfd' xu<S ot ^^m 
Jnseai^ *J3 y^o^-vlrq al sm£ft ijjoy qssjf XXiw I .n-eXq aXrf* iuod£ 
ei ©TSffT .eoltq ^m tjs ad-jBOjsy ot asJtxl isg aeo 1 ^Idjidoi 
o& gvrrf XXXv.- (fjsiiit aai/oil scii nl eiijs^eqw bsip^fs siwiiA-i'iiJ. 
XXi-,v Y*"i9qoic: axfl .gnl\Ci/cr ^^i^q Si.1T .XX^l Ltinu Bzodi tlQL Qd 
-ttnoo boo;; ni Bts. doldi< asJb^rfs wocxiXw srf;t yyo ot 9V£ri oeX„ 
iX£c I %l .Bet£d& orfrf- ao'l 00.0X| ©ci XXlv. sol : :. s;IT .noi' 
saaqjc-i \:Tj3ee9csa erfd ©vr.ii.XXiw I io^Td-? - ssxieii. 

.• ., ".,"^Xii--;ii.s-,aiI gu mvjBii. 

S5i3r::f iflsl 9Cf tisJod& &ji£:iBi^u Jbattotfc aiwdin J^W ibsii pea sH 

l'a£ e©Jbj£rf8 woJbnlw arirf ^'t0cfX'3J'"fi ie&£,da'wq qh: ii, XX^l IXXl 

e« *:£«q ni ^©*X£r 8*0':r ■X©*l/Ji2 . .g^V#jt»vr^V ^ .QX $ T g^ 



"I note by the letters you "/iiive sent taat >ou are not trying 
very hr.ri tc ajoomodats rrs with t.ie houta b May 1st. Now|if 
you do not care to :.'.ake thii dsa,!, we .-.iii pa,ao it up and you 
inay return the ^'250.00 or ii we cj.n arra.npe a a^^vtisi factory 
deal I ahall ,va,nt the nhole place, insurance papers, tax 
recsipta and all other proper papers ir.oluding lei^be so I 
may coll set rent, all _"or ^45CC.OO ths shades are of no 
bsnefit to n.e as I v.'ant new txiings to begin with." 

Tnreil — t:st~^^nirrTart^T~T^3'5lir5ir-tlRe"^bO he Tifnemi: -to 
1aijid_J;he --oasgalir'lSy ■'1 1 ■ anT' t qiic't e3."iyrT8 s . 

SMLtLax,--Cuills--£«i>~tl>e -return of '^^'9™TS3C^"' On March 31 ^'--Itar replied 
ae follovvis: 

"I hav: your letter of ^he 5Cth. ir.st., and arr. enclosing 
letter from Mr. Straok, whereby you can see tnat it 1& 
impossible for .re to get him out by Jx'ay let. but if you 
will buy the pi -ice. let him hcl:. t'.e lease until O:;tobsr 
I vvill be there by Saturday of this week to cloiae the bar- 
gain, 9r aa aeon as I hear from you. 

I un-Leratccd by your fcrn.cr let tera, ^hat you -vould 
not buy the place unleos ycu ccuid talce pcjseasicn by ¥ay 
lit. but by your last letter, I underatand that vou will 
buy t ,e place i^r^'ediately if we could nake a satisfaotorijty 
deal, that ia I •will turn toe laase and oapers over to ycu 
dating from April lat, 
' I will hold the draft I'cr >/&b0.00 until I "near from ycu 
/ or have a verbal conferanc; ith yyu." 
. The letter from Straok v/hich ^alter enclcaed therevdth ahcv.ed that 
hia '.vife .vaa in a hospital and that he was not permitted to discuss 
with her the question of r-iving up the lease, and that he there'vith 
remitted the rent for A-:ril. On A;ril 2 Miss. Stauber replied as 
follc\ 



,ow.: J 



gnlY^'^ *on sis tJO{ iss^.i tcfse s'Vjui uhx e'tscfits^I orf:f -'id Qioa I" 

IJjwoH .*sX \f^ •'■d eaijorf 'grid- rftlw arc d^jsiioaooo-s- 'o#- i»t£.ri ^aav 

ifOY fcn£ qjj :M ee^Q II2w s* ,X£9L afrft 8!3Csct od^ siao io:i o0iroY 

\;'iod-0£'(eirf'3e £ 33n£ii£ 'fi-BO sw 12 TO OO.OSSt arlt aiuizt Ys.ti 

I oa ssrsX 3nll)i;Xonl gocsqjeq' tSqoiq Tsrfjo Xl£ isfl£ B*qi&05i 

' oist'lb 6t:£ asl^jBrie erirf '00.002^$ lol XXjb ;*nsi j-oslloo Y-sto 

'".rid-iw nisecT oJ eartlrfit wsft- tfnje";? I a£ ©.ti o* *llefled 

JbslXqsT 19*X-2W X£ do'xsU aC ^"ttfffST'^Hr'^S'TrajTt-s^-frri*-'*^^^^ 

-^ • *»o.-. :ewoXXoi 8JB 

gnlaoXons icjb bn^ \'.tBnl' ttittiS' hcis-fVo' 'iQi-'^Ql ttrox ^ ^Vj3tf I" 

* ai i-l ;t£i-ft ©se aetj jjo^ t'ci'sidrfw ^slOJs-rJS .*rM raox^ ischd'sl 
X .: ^ : .... 

uov: '^i d-i/cf .tel Y'S'** ^"^ J*"-"^© cofiil :fsg bd- ©tf Tol sIcfiBeoqiai 

" -IJSQ srit 9&0X0 od' isew etdi ^0 y^^'^^-eS Y^f sT^rft ed Lilr I 

'1...... , J ..'. J ■ .-a', ,;:•,,,. 

»uox tsorl •t&ed'T'B'£ rrooe fll£ 19 ,rtijBg 

Y^M Yd noiaeeeaoq s^T^f bXi/iDO x/'oy '•8®Xm; 6oiXq arf^nfud ^orr 

" XXiv: i;ov'>«£td- i)a£ia'i¥£>axi I Vteif'tdX' J&jiX''iubY''Y<^ tfi^^-'^'eX 

Y^^'o^o^-s^^-s^ •s 6''^''**^ bXi;6o sv; "ii ' YiSi^-eJ^J^jeir*! ©OJsXq Si-if Y^cf 

UOY o.t 1SV0 aisqxq Jbnjs ea^eX 3rf:t niuj- XXiw 1 at t&cii ilsBb 

— "'" ■ ■ ■"' •'■'-—"- -- ••• -• .•.-«>.^.r .->. ,j-BX^-xi:ttjA moTl snid-£i) 

UOY moil'rijssfi I Xl^xxu OO.Oas:^' 10^ J-l^ifc sdlt blOd XX Iw I ' 

'\'~i'^ _■■■-■■ 

*id* tswode rf^iwsiViTt l5Va6T6ne~fs*Xi*# 'tfo'iffw ~ioi5'i*8~ moT;! *t6i#-6X 9£fT . 
aei/osiJb od- ijsddiraaeq Vofl 'We*'"Srf tjsrfj- fcitjE Xjetlqen^rf « ni /BfiW- aliv,- elxf 
xfd-isyeiedd- ed *£rft tn^ .aejaoX '©rid- iiji/ anlVi'n "^o nold-esi/p ©ii^- ^extitf^Xi 
8JB tsiXqei Vecft/^i-B «eQlM S Xl-t/. nO .XXtA T'tfl-tfrryr ••srf^-J^d'i-ime'^ 

rewoi 



"I reed your letter of '.^arch 51et. and ?.s the offer ie 
favcrabie I -viah to olc.ie the deal on next vjeek Thuraiay 



\/ ' or Saturday -.vhlch ;ver tirris is ,conveni£n.t Tor you tc co/re. 

You .ray wi'ite me .-.hen you will 'os h&re cr call Joe IJertel 
I 

■.-.hen you reach torm .nd I .vill corr.e icA-n town v.ith him." 
( 

■ at Ictt O E — ill not trs a t th ii d e o^l a^ o - l-o ae; !3 lf bub e xui ' a ' Bi i ibd a — vfi-ah 

\ •'••' \ 

forXhiir; to ooms to Peru ir-d to cloee >ile dsalv on Thursday or 

Saturday of the lollcvving week. It^'^'ill bs ob^ierVed that hs had 

said tl^t she would have tc .^Isfliy tue window 3hadei\i,i;,d pay ^'10 

therefor ahd. she had refused that condition -^r.d he haJi not v/ithdra-.vn 

it. He had W.posed tlye condition that Turniture should'Xr :rrain 

in the houa© tr^l 2all ard shs haa not answered ^hat and She had 

told him that ^0«v should v.ant insurance papers, tax receipts 

and all othar propel: papers, incluJin.T, the ieaas arid he had \ot 

answered /that, except\,a3 to tha lease,' n.rjl that he ^7aa v.aitii?; 

for P i ycr'oal - oonf es^. ^ no^ V >-i r4^^"TreJCu Walter tsstified that hs 

wrote her a letter dated April ^, aaying tnat '..a long ^a 3he '.-.as 

satiisfisd to take tha place he ■■.vould be ir Peru the next Saturday 

to close the deal, though he .3 id not reaember exactly '.■jhat hs vvrots. 

She -.vrote Walter as fclxo.va unler date c.f A ril -it. 

"I .vrote pou on ':he id.iuat tr^at year cfier 3-stKSd favorable 

and I '.vould like to close tae deal] but yesterday I was 

gi /en a much ir.cre liberal c-'fsr, and -vould a^-^prsciate if 

you would cor.iiider ''.dth xs. I v;a3 given p.er.Tjissicn to raniain 

on the saiiie place after Oct. l3t. which I will occupy till 

then; in ^act I hardly think I could arrange tc move then, 

and aa the rtnt from thio place .'oesn't near cover interest, 

taxeu and insurance I -vould much prefer to not close this 

deal at all new. If in the future I desire tbe place (rr'hioh 

would ir.ean rrjuch iT:ore expense and inconvinisnce to ;r.e than say 

present offer) I .vould be very glad to make a bargain then, 

truatinf- you will let me know at your earliest convenience | 



I 



,,.,, *9moQ od" Jtfo^ ipl j-flsixisvnoa ai; emit xevs xlaixiw ^£itzijt£.8 10 \j 

lati&li soL XX£0 TO aisri ecf XXlw iipY cti^rf'^ ©.ti arf-Jt'ivr Yfiir, uoY 

,---_•:-■'■■ \ 

".fliiri ifj-iw jdwo;f avfoJb sitsoo XXiw J-*i>ni. awct rfojBsa uox nex:; 

.,.,..,,. '■,"■■ 1 

' / "^'^ / 

TO ^£ta'xsjdT rco/l£si) sJM. , »8oXo pit fccc£ une^ 0* emoo' od^ miil/ioi 
Jbjsri Sri d-jscfJ- l)9y4s»cfo so' XXi;V>s*I .isew j^nlwoXXol sxiit.: So Y£jjm;*£8 

WKJBzbdilit &on JEljed srf Jbnjp aoltlt'iioo tJBili- Jb^i^i/I©! l)«ri aria W^ lolsisiJJ 

; .^ ,-..,. nlj8ai£7/i)XjJorie 8trjj:}'Jtni0'j; ; tfirit noJt#itn©o\ri* liseQqmi ij^if sK .*! 

tfiri srJ^ bni: d-jErf-" i^eiswen^ *on i)£rf sile l)a£ XXjb\ Xl/it ©euorf Sd* aJt 

.y^qlsosi *<ec^ «aT8qjBq eoaj^Tjuexii tn^^w tXi/orfa /Biie d-^ifJ mJtri LXot 

iojFf l)£rf srf i3xi£ ©^«9X .fdJ.QiiitwXcni; ,«a9qjBq 34qo%ci ^sricfp i;i£ i)nj8 

4il&tM;fi asw.sci vJ-jad* i)£ii; ;,,®&jp,%X ;.,,:*ii* ot a^Jtqepxe ,^jbi->. joeTtswaxut 

Y^Jbiird-fS txen edi x/iq"? al acf tXtfow srf ©OJsXq srit si£t ot b&t\alt,Be 
,&:fOTfi «ri ^jsrfr i2;XS-c«X9 iscfmsiasi tqa bit sd d'SjUodi ^L&dbjsdi ©eoXc 0* 
^ . , . ;^ XlaqA lo dd-jsl) istnw ewoXIol- e^ Z3&£sfl s&oiv erit 
8Xo'£iovj3l Ijarnsia isllo tuoAj d'ijri* tfaaX.JbS erij- ao uor sJ-oiTil'' 

..(^,«3w I vjaliTsd-esv- rfuu iX^si s/l:f aeoX-o o^ 8;£iX ^Xjjow I ha& 

Y «■ ^ * 

It s:t£Xc3xqojs tXyow Jbas . »iC8llo X,fiTsdXX. OTCom ./foura jb na.vXg 

rxX^meT oS noxaaixisc, nsvig bjsv/ I ,9X' ri;f.iw. leMenoo Mifow uov 

j^, XXXI YQUOcc XXiw X rioXriw: .*8X . <fqO Tied-lp •OJpXq ©n;sQ Bfii ac 

.nerit 9V0.it oc.^ ssruETSjB ^Xiioc I iniriJ- icXfcaijri l tofi^ ai [(ten:' 

ttB^Jp&al levoo ijcan t^aeeot aojeXq e^idi 0x01% tapr «<>.*..«« fcn^- 

rj-ldf eaoXc ton oi ^slarrq rfoiran fcXi/ow I ©onoBii/eaX ii>nB .esx#^x'. 
rfplrfw), aojpXq ad* eii8^|>, J aiwi'jjl ©ri;^ ni II .wprr XX^ *« X^sr 
)fBt n^jij- 'dm pd- ©oxxeinevnopai taxs tanaqxa^asom rio.um aea.T. jbXjjo* 
^aedi nijBgiBcf js s^J^m ot bM:^ Yi^v -^^' Mirow I (asllo tnsaaiq 



if this i3 eatisfaotory to you and if you vvould be kind 
enough to retxirn the ^£50, 00." 
Tlii.a— v ;'ao :- M s ithy j ^awo-l t 'rom tha .negot i at i orl a -' . pg t — ; he ha d a right t o, 
'"(withdraw unj^jeV^vall the tero^a of a birdirig^coKtract had been ar- 
I 3 ?- angsd - t Under date of A-?ril 6, hs replied to iisr fiat she iriust 
stick to her arrrrsment or lose «aat she had paid down. He therein 
told her what insurance he had o.: the house itr^d -^hen the policy 
expired and offered to turn taie insurance over to her -vithout 
chargeif thie beinj the I'irat tirre that he had replied to her 
request that the insurance papers should os turned over to her. 
He also stated t'.at he had an aostract -.vhich he v/culd give her 
and that he would be at a certain o ifice in Peru on Saturday 
A:ril 11. Hs did appear at that cffice at that tia-.e and Yias. 

Sauber did not a peartllt a:;ti!iie entirely cisar/tc us ."rojri a 

\ / 

consideration cr the fcregoin.V correspondence/ t::at at nc tirr.e 

did each partya^ree to ail thsVterrr.s of ^he other. Miss. Sauter 
refused to pay extra 'cr the winaow shades and V'alter did not 
withdraw the demand that she ahipuid. Mi3s% Sauter de-^anded the 
insurance papers and TTalter did not o 'fer to comply --vith t:iat 
require.i.ent until after ene had vifAdravm frcori the negotiations. 
Hie request that she should allov. certain .-"L/jrniture to rena-in 
stored in the buildtng had never b-^ejil .^.ccspted by her. She re- 
quested t-.;e tax receipts and he ■:ey?er of^vJered to ieliver the 
receipts to her. She requested^o'ther propVr papers and rat 
(those capers were had not oesn dater.T.ined, It is evident that 
/■it \r:j.3 intended to endeavor tp effect an agreement on these 
^various :;;atterQ v.-en he cam a' to Peru a-ad haa\ a verbal conference 
; (with her. There had been no/diBCU3bion or agreem^ent as to the 

form of the deed. Tfalter 1^1 received the rent fos April ;and 
. there Viad b^en no agreement whether hs should retain it or should 
pay it to Miss. Sauter. It is o-or coreluaion that the niinds of 

/ 



J3j--ijt^i i jB JiMsi erf e bc tr - g^ii io id'^i Jog - SMa o rtJ- moil IjWjoTf J St/tti^ x; hbw b fff T 

d-aum sria *jsi^t isrl o^ JbsxXqsi sri ,0 IliqA lo ©djBJfc isbrrU ^L e ggAT: ' 
nJtsiBrf;^ 9H .flwofsilx-q JbBii' erfa iJ^rlw' eftol to tnameitr^s. leri oJ ioii-B 
YoiXoq srf^ nsffw .fc'rr^ 98uorf srf^'nb Jbjerf art eoaeiuani t£dn rkd tloi 
iisoclttfi red ot levo aonjBti/sni' erfj nijj^f "oJ fcsisHo bhs tsaiqxs 

.i9tl ot levo Lsrf'iijit ecf bLuods aisqaq aoaeijjanl sricf t£d& taQuper 

Tsrf avis jblijow sff ffoiriw tojBi^adjs n£ fijarf srf JjexfJ-' J&s^jbTs beXx" sH 

^j3i)T0f£?- no jJTs'Tf nt soiJl o nijBii30 £' *£ 'scf LXIrow Srf t£rfj iJinfe 

.eaiV Jtn^ ^mlt' tsdt i£ Qotllo ^.adi &£ rissqq^ bib sE .XX Xi'^qA 

J8 aioi'r ax/ oAi£3lo ijXeilJ-ns amafsa tl . XJeaq^ jd *ori tiJb is;fx;fiB 

■\ / ^ 

erai* on *£ d-jerf^f \6oa6bnoqBeiioo pnlo-geio'^ sY^t "^o nol*£l&fcl£rfo& 

istusB .68 iM .a9rfi-c\ snt lo atnisiysnt IIb b* seisivi'i'Sq riojBs fcXl 

iJ"on bib t5&l£7! Jbnx, aeJb^rra vroLnXw' sirit tol jBisfxe yjsq o:f ijsejj-lsi 

eif* beLn^-naJb tsd-|/x;8 .e'lpiM ,bLua'de ©rfa iJ-£ri,t ijnjsaiat- edi v-arbdit.'; 

tjsrit ri*lw ^iXqmoo o* ^al'o /on tii) is#Xjelf i)n£ aTaqjeq eoasiueht 

.enox^fiXiJossii &dt moil nwsdiljatiw Jbosri ana I'srHs Xi:f_au ^namsilapei 



xiijsrrsi 0^ eix/d-in'iJj'i nljeVaeo woXl« JbXuorie brfe"' *£xfi- Jeaupsa aiK 



/ > 



-oi eriS ."lad ^cf bad-qsco^ rt35cf revsa Jb£rl a^^-'^-ii'<^ ^^^ "-^ Jbsioi^e 
srfj laviXat od- beie^rAo twya'- e"rf 'tnis atqieoai tsf s.'.i- Jbedssu. 

■ ■ ~- / ■ \ ... . ■ I . : 

t£r'vr jbnjB eiaqjBq zfqo.rq tssfifb fcadesixpai erfST .aarf od' ad'qiscei 

/■, . , > ^ - .-■ 
d-jBrid- iaettve st il ■ ,b9nimie&i)p need d-on f)£xf eiaw eiaqsq aaorfo 



ipi 



9&Qdi no iasmea^ss as Posits \t tbvjsabna 'od- ijajbnadnl ajsw d. 
Boaeislaoo Xjsdiav i /ojsrf'jbni? wxqI oi\iBSio aid narfyr' aTed'd'jBm ajJoXxev 
arfd od 8JE d'na/aeisJB 10 noiaej/oeftVon nsad JbjBff aisriT .leri ri^iv 



ba£. Itrck jilol tasr sdi Jbtvlaoa-r b^ ladX^W .Jbaef- sr:.^ *o raio' 

bLxiOii^ 10 cM at£t9n JBJBjJOila ed tartd'arfw d'nii'rnssiajs on nssd JB^rl siad.^ 

:o aijnJtai .'iarfd- rf'jsrid- noiax/Xenoo ino ei d-r^.ied-ifiS .ealM o* d-1 \£c 



th3 parties never mst on all the terms of a contract. Corcoran v 
White, 117 111. 113; Liiddaugh V Stough 131 III. ^13; Scott v FoT7lsr 
337 111, 10-i. 

Ths judgmeirt is therefore affir^ri.ed* 






i-- 



V fljBiooToO .toi:.rtaoo a lo amis* erf* lie, no iem tevBci aaijijsq erf* 
isIrrc'J V *.*oo3 (SXi; .III 181 ci-QuoiB v rfgx/jibiJiM ^SXI .XII Vix ,©*idW 

.iOX .III ?££. 

vCi^-C;' -. ■ :' ■ ' ■.■■■■' '*'t:J.;,: L: ' "C i:,J-.V 3'. 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ^, 

SECOND DISTRICT. I '''^' I. C-HPasTOPHER C. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, iu aud for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing- is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa. this__ 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



k.!.;/. 'Mit 1. Ai-Al) 



i- :^ 



S -'^) ''^'i.? ■ ' 






AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT,, 



/ '"^ f 



^ 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth' day of October, 

in the year of our Lord one thousand nine huridred and fifteen, 

within and for the Second District of the ^tate of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presiding- Justice. 

i 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice./ 

Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justice/ 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk./ 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 




1 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ares 
follov/ing-, to-wit: 



r'P\:i 



<r--. 



: oni'IJI '.to -3 + .r5,tri &.rij 'io i f5 i"'-:? 3 f CI ■ bnooog srfj to^ 



n c : r a r ■■ c t , a 5 1 j^' -'/'T 3 .' 1 
B V ■; L' •£ r 1 bn s a b 7 o w a rli n i , j •. .v - 



Gen. IJo. 8311 

P. J. Mtlistt, T^eft in srrcr 

ve Error tc Kane. 

D, J. MoDon-jld, ^Itf in ©rror» 
rro-ili, '^. J, 

1 2» J- >'':iJl9tt c-''inS:x farrri near T'ari9, Kti tucky, vher-^ he live 

and n:- 'pir*?^' contract e .for railroad oonstrustion -v- rk in varices 
parts cf the United Statea. T'. J. McDonald c^mi^. farrr: near Aurora 
Ijiincie fehsrs lie ioi^ree, ;.nd ae oi^ lik'; -vork in variou* parts 
of f'ie United States. The parties had knovn aash oth3r fov ysars, 
and during the tirrs covered by tns tranoaoticng hsre in./olvsd 
were in varioua carts cf the Scath. Oxi — (lf^ 4 1 ■ ■! &f ~i:Q±^--^±±'TZ'^ t 

brjaiigii±.-fcfe4-s-"-«M!i4't--«a*a^^ ^M«'Ba«%ia'''"61i'™t'lTr i'e'Xc st promi s sory notes 

/ on^, for |l,n£LQ>.,..d3^.gd M.a5N>^ 

( 19^9 _and one for $:iiE££^_x^4lJi^.t£5l.Jbai^s.d.-A-t^^ 
( d ue, on oe^!^xsA^XtAAl^3JS.SJi-t.-.a.±.J^l!L.oe^^ Bi: .a uUR^ H3 ^m s d 

a spsoial count on each cf the notes an.i th':. aon&olido,t?'> coTXiOffi 
counts. McDonald fixe-d nuaerous pleas, t''j.e sx:x general i sua, a 
i denial cf signature, set off, release, cayn'ent, accord -and =atie- 
faction, lack cf ocn ideraticn, and that thsnotes v^ers p-ivgn in a 
..rt.-srship tr^inaacticn Octv,-3sn the carties, the accounts cf v.'hioh 
.d not been closed. -4J^'^^fr-rr-jnTy~"TT Lfx l-fh g 7 "' j~'rTrg'--''nr--¥-e-3g44-c-tuL£ 
plaintiff for iU.CSS. On Wbru?.ry ii, 1915, 03 on April 13, 1S15 
after mcticna for a nev/ triajtv^^nd in arrest of judgti^snt had oeen 
overruled, plaintiff had a jud^rHjit I'or .i,^,ll7, being ihz verdict 
with ieral interest ther-.on /f ron". itV^rtnditici:. Thii ia a /vrit 
of error broikght by McDoncidd to rsvievXsaid judgaient. 

The iceoial counts on the notea :ad net state that thc-y 
weie payable at any particular pl-^^ce. On crois exair.i.'iation 
of Millett, he ctated t""at the ncts:^ 7;sr8 payable at Jchr:3on 



/City, T-=:nne33ee. He did not b-5;k to anf'snd the special counts 

/of the deolaration, so as to correctly describe tne notes./THreT^ 






IIS3 .oV. .aeC 

.10"! 19 nl 't&L^. ^.bli-noQoM .1. .Q 
.L .<^ ,IIecfia 



B&i^q «tici'i£v ni: afTos^ sjfil a^*- ®rf i>nr> tSsviii an sisdii sxonilil 

wS' snifl. T)"8iF£JD'"'0Cr^-'tli"-<f^-%-'^aa..,. ..e:j£A.-<-0^;^-^ is «.i.pj5. . » 3-00 ^X| io^ s no 
-Tr5£T~7tefl~~ir^-^&W3to^~&si4£J[iJ?0^ io!i snro bn.-^ 2051 

Co.T.Tioc bs:t£,fciXooaoc ?rfj- fcn.e aa^orr Qdt lo rfo^s no ^ojjo'c Ijsicsqa 5 
£ ,e.U8:i IwBisas^tt xxx edt ^s«esTq euoTsmjjn taiil- il^noQolf .etoifoo 
-ex^££ tnt- raoco£ ,j-a3:nv:-eq «ss£$I©a »Ho i;98 ,9Tx;;}".E.isia ^;o X^xnei: 
js nJt nsvi-c 31SW e^top-fiit iscli tciB ^aoiietBbt-noo lo ^obX ^xtold'oxsl 
dotdw "io 6;tnjJoco£ srl* jssiti^q srft nsewi-sd noxd-o-sanxsi* qliiais.ii'ijsq 
T^2-l--Ai^-^'i^*«^i'-'"*'~*5S^"''^^ xiaacf *on r.rl 

5XeX .SX Xii-iA no ta -^ ,5XSi ^sk ^{T£if7a>/ iiO .£80,^1^ toI lliJnlj. Lq 
nsso" tBil irrengfjui; lo JssTii; ax M.3/l,exit vifdn £ lol: snoitom jsils 
toibisv 3fft gfiXscf «VXX,i^!5 Tol (tiX^mWijj; £ iijsil lltinisLq ,JbsXui-irv;j 
Jiiv *: bx axnT ,aoLiibnetJBtl .uoiryflosTsriJ JasTsJ-nti: Xjbj^sX riu . 
cJ-nOiTijjJujJt tti^aXslvsi oj- isi^enoCToM ^^cf itrfgilroid loxis 
Ysr'^ *£'rft ofyiB ioa tit sston Sif.t ao sd-m/oo Ijsioaqs srIT 
nolitjenXasxe eeoio nO .dOiUq :t*Xx/oIJi£q ^n£ t£ •Xtfos^^q ei 
noBiTrioL tf'js &L<S£\&q eisw ee^on sri* J«rf* beiste ari ,Ji9[Xils 'io. 
e;tfU/oa Ijeioeqs orft fcne;f.je od" 3tee« Jon £;lfc sH .asee^nnsT ,v*i3| 



was X therefore a. varian\e bst-rssn ':lye three •■osoial counts and 



the tlireg not a proven, an5»^ ths^ could bf: no recovery unier a^i-id 
apeoiai counta, and McDonalpt^aa siititled to uive given rhree 
instru.:;tiona -vhicb he Ji3ked, d^eoting ?. verdict •if.-^in^t plaintiff 
aa to the first, S'.2^nd and third c^^-mta of the iecl-^^ration. But 
/Millett proved the exi^stence ol tne notej, xaa .signature ol McDonald 
ithsi*eto, his payn:ont to McDonald of the prinoipil suiiia nai'sd in 
~3aid noteis and that he lost the notss aftsr ra,iturity. He — ,*-ia — I r tterg — - 
ifore er.titlsd to raoovfesr uiidp^r the oornrrion counts, if Qt.ier ie- 
jfenses hereinafter rei-ej-ifsSs^c wars net e9 bablishsd; ?.nd 
McDonaxd -lo.s not heiruv^m oy tna Tvfu'iai ot* the court tc -i^'e ©Aid 
i->iBq.,=. ^, o..-~^^,- -,-Knnr . McDonald adnittsd a-jkine,- for and rocsiving 
the thr3S 3u:;.s 01 rr.onsyj and the t'lrs© cnecks upon n^hich tr.sy 
were paid vrars in evidcnco cearing hia -c-ndcryotnant; and ns adir.itted 
giving memoranda iho-.vi/'g hiij reoi^ipt ox thoss ssver:;/! au'T'a . He 
claiir.ed to io^l*' -h-^ithaj.' hs ?^2.V2 notes for thsm, Tout Isttf-rs frorr. 

d 3ind a note cr 



hiiT. in avidsace jltovf ui;n? Iv--!"' '.'• riy, -hat he 



ea 



ch of sail surra. H.3 j.y!Uid, not olain: 



;o have p-^id.theai. 



• Z OD ' 



ject of the co.T.rr.on countsH^ 3>tt;h a suit i* to ^rctnct a plaintifi 
agairst aoxs aeoidental vv^^ri^ i" ^-'^-Z degcri /tion of notes 3U9d 



ViOLonald olai.n^'^tlTat in Tz'oi 



• ruary 1S09 he and Millett -r.et at 
Knoxvills Tenneaes?, an.ji tornrsl a partnership in railroad construc- 
tion .vorkj tfiat he- .v-s tc put in his eqaipiTiv-int , v':;rth perhaps 
*30,C00 and Millett v/as to cut in $50, COO in ca^ih and Milistt -vae 
to be allowed 3ix p:r csnt interest on hj. s iionsy and ¥cBon?.ld 
was to be alleged six per cent interest upon a valuation .'hi oh 

as to be tade upon hie squiprasnt, ani that these moneys .vers 
advanced by !iiil-.ott tc jicLon:.ld for the pxpensee o" "aid p.artner- 
ship, and that the partnership v^!nd^d in Deosa^ber folloTing vvithout 
any contracts bein~ tahen or any "jcrk Dsing lone; and he daisied 
to have spexit $S,000 or ^3,000 in exrcnsee in ti^avellin? about 



the country and trying to get contracts, and .hile he did state. 



v. 



bar e&auQO Xxioso^ 3&Ti:f+ »4i naev.-lacf Bjon&trsv £ eioTtsiarft x e£W 

"*'x / 

d-iiS .nox;t£ix:Xosi' sn't 'lo e^truaot iiiri*- Lr;^ rnob«8 ,i-aail srfd- oj e« 
nx ijeriT^n eayLre X^qxoni'i-q srl^f "io JbX^aoCioM oJ- Jns.'ji^jsq eX4 ,o4-svc-J-! 
-sr Tsrido "xx «s;^^xfoc; aommoo an';'- i«€iiaix; jp^vopsi ocf teXdti:fns ^loi 

bt^a svxg 0^ fujjoo sx'.t "to i£:ejj'1:s<r srf;t >fcf i>e:c^s^ d-on e^w JfaX-saoOpM 
\jst!:' -d&idp noqss eioaxlc eeT.iid' arii .bnjs ijfenom ^o eiv-xie ©e'l 

sH .erM/a X£T?vss es.Oil:'- lo if qi©c&,i _esi£[ aaxwod* . ataxiiooism ariivi> 

- - . - ■. - - ■ -■--■-■■■. . ■ ■, ■ „• ^^; i"' ■...■* -J-. ■ ' ''■'' : : ■ '** , • ** 

ao-t e:fcn *3 case L-ib erl *£xf;' ■;; r *■ v f r- 1 f f ^ rr f,,' Ji^-wg^ aonefclvs ni (r.ix(. 



tltx^nxxsXq £ d-oetortc/ ol c-t ttk'a ^ xIvm.^ ai'''ed"fix;oc noaycQC sriJ, I9 ,d-.os.c 
fceue esifOK lo noldqiioeeb srl:* ni: j^<m£>T^v Xje^nstloeje eaioe tfeni^gA 

t£. tsT * + eXXiM iir.'.r ?fl 90QI i(lJBX;-icfs1 flfi tjco:J^rni£Xo JbXx.noaoiv: 
-out-jeacc i-x-.o-rlXx^i nj: qXrite^csnti^q £. Xsa^ic'l fcn^ ,asaeenn9T eXXXvjccoX 
ecii^i^isc Aizor ^dTtDmqxLp© eixi nX *xjq pi ec^-i sri ..^lE.-'d- jiic 
•£v *teIIxM iini: fle^BO nl 000, OSi ni: ^i/c. oi^ aav Jts^CXiM Jbn^ OGv.ww „ 
JbX>:rio^o¥ tnj- ^eiTOrti airf fio {tesTSi'fl^ rfne^o isq: xie JbewoXi£ eo' p^ 

9T&* SY^noa? ogspM Jidj Las ,JasciqX0p3 eXxf aoqx; c. .i a^ 

-itn^ijaq bti:v. lo essnoqxe edi jc'i bXeaoCioUpt itelLJLi,^ 'id b8oas\-- 
fuodil^ gnlroXXol Tstfmsosa at Jbafcxio qldaaenJix .qXrlt 



that ITil.lstt made a part of these trjpa v?.i th him, ha .-t^te,d that 
Millstt ii.I net ?,l-.viys a-o :7ith him -;.rd he ji'f.pliei irhat Millst's 
expenass may havs hsan I333 than hir. o'vn; hu.; -^hat -^r^e aih-airs 
of oaid c.?,rtn3r3riip h-id net been est tied and th-.tt ainue this auit 
Wd3 bS'gun, halhad filed a hill in ecuity ^r'■.i^l3t Mi'- let t to have 
the a.joounto ct' the lirm s~-ttled, in ..nloh he ^et up -^.he^e rrioneys 
as advance i bj Miiiett tc the partnership. Villett dsrisi that 
any partnership -vas ever Locwed, hut allsged tha'C rhey uijreed at 
KncTcville to try to get sc.r.s oGntv:'.ots "or railroad construction 
worl:, and, i'.' th'cy cbt^insd ^ujh contrr-cte, tliey v.oulJ ha .cart- 
nsra in ^uch '.vork, out that no contracts' ware obteined and no 
partnership v.-a? formed; and also th-rt -^hsas won'sya v/sre net \j- 
vanc3d in any partnership ^natter but a'Sv; lc:~:,nsd by hiir. to 'ioDonald 
to T'iat ItoDcn^^ld'i own pr-asainj fina.ncial nscatsitlss. The- oc.r--«i3- 
pona'Lnoe which af tsr^'arde lollov/au b^tv/'i'in the parties .^S' iv. svi- 



denoe p^nd ^jhcw* repeated proifiissa by Iv'oConald to pay ¥iilett these 
)f t^-.eiu 3hc>v#^ that he 



Icana a:.d ons Oj 



had paid |i.l9i intare^t thereon 



and ir. nona of the i.ettere J sJLeft^ McDonald claim that th.sse 'r.onoye 
wers advanooi in a partnership transaction. T%-s — jtrrj — vg"" . f i i r ^lly 
instructed in favcr o^YcDouald, if thesa.'ivsre partnership .nattsrs. 
Millett oompiaina of the \e1u3al of op-€"' instruction on tnat buo- 
ject, but v/e are of ths <ipirrion t,^t :-;3 grcuna was fully covered 



^ 



by i not ructions that were c,iv.«'iK This iesus '.vaij determined by 
t'.ic jury aj-rainst McDonal;iJ^*and ws -aXp of opinion that the prepon- 

McDonald clairced thr>35 itsme oi" ?st~oVf. He alleged ^hat h-- 
i had -jOII and jslivered to 'itillett a cert.-dn sngina ':'or tSCO and 
certain steal rails or ^-ilB, and that he had loaned I'illatt .;'300 
Ths 'i-ngins and ths rails wiirc not '.vh'^re the oarties -vsre, a-.-id -t^t«- 
■; ea^2rS=?iKrr"-i-d— 5^;:53»--*-»=k4 nsith3r -.vere sver dslivsrad tc Yili3tt and 
neve:,r caite into hia poaa^c-cion, but '':hey appear to have b->^n aeixed 



i: i ^«- 



j-^rf* betV^s &n \mtti diH' egtrr* 9k9ti& toytr^t( ¥■ Qhsh' ' tftLLiW- terit 
e^tsLIlU iMcil t^Jtlqm.t sn trip ffllrf xffiir 05 a'^f^-fs i-.. . tfillM 

eih£t.lB ent ^jsr^-^ >t.ucf ^nwo «Jtri ccisf;* aesl irsscf- ©vjsri ifJS* eserreqxft 

sVBjrf ocf JifsIt.IM :fenir'^f Y^-^i^ps "i IlJtri js i50l±-'!£ fceriWif .mrgstf sjbw 
"«YS"0'" ©isff-* qu #ft6 erf rioirfw kI ,i5sidcfRB miii 9di 'ic B^nwo-- 

noii'oi/iijenoc Jb:poiIx.ei toI ed-Oj- ^.tntot' ^rco^ ;J'©^' 0* Y'-^j* o* 'sXIivxorLS 

Off tae Lsrri'.otcfo eiew 8jO*Trf-aoo on tMdt -iud ^irov lioua al ei^ff 

'tF iod ePaev.- ax^aott ee^rfr* le.'^.i, oaijs Jbrije lirsniToi '•' ■s'jst- qirfsisn^fi^q 

f3i£fToCrolf o* miif Y<^' teo£oi C1SV tucf astJairt-. . qi-ifeTand-^E^q ^Jfr^ '^-t^ •^^o'^sv 

-aeTrroc srfT .esitiea-e'oarf X^etcnjSitl^.'Srfiesfitq- mro s ^JbX.'^noQoM {f«e.T Qt 

6zecii ;^J&XIi'i if£q 0^ iiX^noCIoM y<^ 6S-.e^fdTg:£>9it£Sq8l^woxl3 bflja ©Ofl^t 
aoBisdt i68Te*nx £8X| Sii^q £>£ri 3rf tsixf i' t*%wod6 ar^rf^t lo sao 'baij^en.^.-?! 

eifsnoffl dasjft Ji-ilt oixjsXo JbXvSnoaoM J&stet aist j-al -«rft -lo ©flon 
. ylJ^ ^ ' l ' ■ "^' SVi '{1^1 ~^^'^ .iiOiuO^SiXSTd'^qirfa'rsrid'TjECs- J5 ni fcsoxuvii'js stvrf 

-c/ua d-js;l,t no noX;fou:c;Jeni Vqo lo Xje-sirlaa =tif,t lo eaijBXqmoo J-J-siXllil 
fcaiavoc Y-tXul a£w inuoxg srfi- ^j^,^ no/nicj4 erfc^ 'Id- STie ■ »w jud ,?t.9t 
"" ifd JbaalniTSd'sc a^w suisat sirfT y^vla ©isv.- *Bfft enoli-QiiT#-5ni xd\ 
-ftoqsiq stf:^ d-£f:.j fiolnl.70 Ic ©/£. ©w ijiiXiXjBnoaoM jJ-eni^j^ ^'iJ-'fc 

« flte i eij^cjiaa..,jlji^.ajUfiA.&ua-,-.fe^^ ■ n rfJ- .- ' i c u b o o...: . 
wtf *jeff* tessXXis eH ilJo-iee Uo am©*! $8TrfJ- isailiXo i^XxsnoCIoM' 
trra GOe| toI snigns nliiJiso « tisZLtU oi tsrrsviXet fcnjE JbXoa ~ •;' 
OOS^ tisLliU JbenxoX bed &ci tMi- tnjk ,8Xi>:^ to": eXi^T X©&;fB ^i£^. . 
•-ef^t^ bnii ,di8?s- eslJ'tjEq ©ffd- aierf* ^oit stew aXixjn'srl* tc\s. snlgne r 
Jbn/3'*-:t»Xii3f'6;f' biiaviXet isvs stow isrfJIen *»e4--i^«t^~HE3f=*fT^9Jri** 
bexiett cj&r^ r .0' ,noJtesa86oq eirf oi/ii ©mjjo ts 



^ 



on attachment aga-inst KoDonald. McDonald cti:l ;;ivs Millett a 
caeck Tor $dOO* MoDonail teati-ied th^.t this "tis Koney ■irhioh h- 
lor.nsol to iiilistt. Mill-stt testified that ae loaned UoDonald 
this riicr.ay anj tcck ti*is check in p^ymsnt . Tir? — j u r y — f o unl ' ■ "€ >ic>-~.-^ 
Milistt on t.liia iosue -.rr>sfe^r^e vies nee does not wp^rrant u-: in disturUng 
their concluaion. ^•'' 

On tns jrcsa sxarr.inaticn ci McDonald Yillett'a coimsal oallsd 



for 1; 



,3rs of various i-pecifiei dates. 



ifxed to aave b?en 



wri-ttsn by i/illett to McDcnaxd, •s.r.d no auch iettrrg ivsTfi produced 
by i'cDonali or nis counssi. Thersu^on couaael "or Mi^lett reau to 
McDonald irpip Isvarioua papers ■."hich he he si. in his hand, "-vhioh 
purported to oe carbon copies T such Istters irom Mil^ett to 
McDonald, and as>ed kcDcnald ivhether he r3C'?iv3d aucn lett^-rs, to 
which j^cDcnald replied tnat he did net knew or iid net r'^-re-rfosr, 
and counsel a?.ked i'cDonald 7h=ther varioue rst- te.r.snts reaj to him 
'fferc true. Thii was all dore ov^er ''.le obj^ctiona ox McDoraid' a 

counsel- / '^ ^r= r-s — t^::^s~^-^=i-fi±xrrr--t'^rTt~'>'tr^'TXiV.'^^ hij-;hly 

Jj^icxcf-ex-^ At that tirr.e no one had te&tii'ied that ■^hese .vere in 
fact true copies of Is'tere '.vnicb r,ad oeen v/rittsn ar. .i ^nailed to 
McDonald, and they then appeared to be p'ierely self servtn.rr 5eelar- 
aticns. rJ-©--^»,-uii__iia£-_ii^©AJtl4-4ia^-^--4^ these pp^^rs 

until it had b?en ;?roved\lhat '.hey ^evk true cop.. ea of iett rs 
which aad oeen in fact, -.r it ten and sign el o Miliett an:' duly 
mailed to McDonald properly aUdreased and etamped ?vrd placed in 
the ?oat Office. Thgy ccujd onXy then be evidence in favcr of 

Millet b if T/..ey a.:peared to b-e paJsts of a corrsepcndenoe b?t-.7esn 

/ \ 

the two u on t-c eubjacte .i'n/olved ir this suit. Ey reading them 

into qusdCiona their au/t)Btanoe was placed refers the iiix-y 
before chay had Deen.^hown to os competeVt- evidence. But after- 
wards -1!;^ neoed^ary p.' oo* was jrade go aaffiir-^thsse carbon copies in 
evider^oa in ccnneotioii ".-ith various letters from McDonald to i.-ixiett» 



6l££ioaoM benzol stc tscii t^i'Lltsst itelLtU .iielLll^ oi csasoi 

^-»»^H £' ftg o J r ■ T ' -fi) I t^i' sT - *iTj^r»iif.eq ai sioSflo aiiU iooi Lri£ Ysaoic eiri? 

g/Ttfii/j'eit ai si; ifnjeTijsvc *on Esofc sonsbive^^t^iHgiTi^ tfiaet &iiii no tislit 
f. ../ - - . ■■ .. .■'''^■- ■ ^^^ ,aQi9uL^tiot)-'ii9iit 

Jbsotf^oiq &1S1R Piej-tgl Acub off ba^ ,i)i^aoaoffl 03^ ti^liiU ^cf asttitw 

oi b&st #J-©fI2M 70" Xeeawoo noc:JL/©'rsrfT .leanwOG »xri lo •Jbl£rroQoM ^cf 

dcxrfv ,i)njef[ slrf„ai.&l9rf «d rioiriw ai&qjtjq auoiiJsvKJt jpqni fclirnSjCIoM 

ot d'yaiilM (bo's.! ei©;^!?! rious la eeijoo xiodxsc sa o;f bsifiooiuq 

xtii oi fc«st tcf'ffarnet.ets sjjoii^v laritsii?.- iJlanodoM ^eia* issru/oo J&fie 
8*^)1^x1005?/ Io ttaoitofiildo an't isvo 9no£* XXs SvSw'' aidT .♦u-rt sis 

nx ei;8Vf ©g&rf+ J-jsrit bai^iiasi i)jB.rf ©no oa e;rii:,t d-^nt *A «^3qr?Jiajaj. 
0* b9Lisr^ ba£ nB&il'iin nasci £)jai •rfoiriw fin9&-*&l jto aeiqoo 9x;tj *&jel 
-ijBlosi 2ativas8 Jl9% ^l9'Z3iv. 96 ot Jb«i.s©qg.s xTsrf:t ^«n't JbfiJS- ,i5iiJxioaall 
- M!*(r^tstt 9Beiii la £Aii:iin^q- ^i»auj ..-<»4fe&i(i-Ji4-t<:^/u>-..a£AL„fira(,) a—e^A . saaii. 
■. . m-i'* :f tsl . Io as-Lqoc ax/ij s^ttcjw ^3n# J^ri^osvoiq a99d Jb-erf ;) x llinu 
tfXi/fe DHA i-jSlIiM d bsngLd ,bnj:y ^^:^J^i•tv■7 \*0£;t ai A9&d Jbjsri nolxi' 
ni Jbsoalq fcijs b&qmjsta bets b93ii&tLjs£ vjirr«qoi<j JbliirrorioM oi bQii^s 
\o lov-s'i ax so/TStiva ecf nsrii^ i^^o Mi/o^o t*^ .«oi'^'tO i^eo*^' aii 
ne^T/^^C 9oaBi:noq.96"tTOo « 'lo aJ-a«q "W oif bsts^qqs x^if IX tiaiiiH 

noiif pnJtn-sei ^I ,tiua axrf# /yf aevXouiii e.t08(;c£uB sia aouu ow^ »a 

/ \ 

TUJt ȣitf siols'^ i)eo4<Lq ajiw 9oxi^*acf uu xiedrf' anoxJeajjo w i 

\ 
^Tidtlsi fsjQ. .soxrscive :^p^3&t>qsaoi, so o;^ «woxiA,naecl iwiil '{oi.. 

ini: «9xqoo po<i'tsQ eaetii/i IsiJb'A o& ajo-eit aaw lootrq \»j3HB80t'n snf'u 

*i- . ii f>Xj!jnoCIoM taoi^x eisrf tsi Bxjolii;v xl;tiw iioid-obnnoo- ni odri. 



We oonclude th^.t no iiaxm \7'ib ;ons to McDonald, though the letters; 
shoulol V.ave bosxi prcpcriy put in -svid'eriCS befors he r^as oroes 
examined u oi.i theff;. The ccnoluaion 1;^ ir.svi + ahls Trom a'il -^he 
corresponasnc'; 1-hat this rnor';.y v;-as net pvCivanoeci in corir.-action 
\Titli any js-rtnership tranas-otion ani that McDonald re'-oatedly 
recosniiied his pcracnal liability 'c pay these Tror.sys b-i:k to 
Miilebt. TiiS acetraot i3 :r!c!3.gre and o^nits impcrtart things. We have 
reaa ail the avids-r-oe in ths record and are satisficj fat the jury 
ccuxd not h.^.ve found di-Merently e::oept as ts t aat as to the .;;*C'0 
check thay .ragLt navs iTouiid either Tray* 

Trj2 juag;i'i=nt is tnsi-efcrs affirmed. 









■ 1.!; V.W*/ 4 '■♦•■wv ii: 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, \ _ 

SECOND DISTRICT. i" ^^' L CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, iu aud for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court iu the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clei'k of the Appellate Court. 



-¥' 



f 

AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COUliT , 



/ / 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice./ 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. 5 * 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. / 



.X' 



/ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

FEB .' 1916 the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figares 
following, to-wit: 



Sv- 




il 5.6' 



Gen. No. 6330, 

Jswel Tea Company, appellee 

V8 Appeal from Psoria. 

A. T. Peterson, appellant. 



Droell, P. J, 

The Jewel Tea Company, a corporation, hereinafter called 
the company, entered into a contract in writing r;ith A, T. 
Peterson to carry on certainbusineas for it in Peoria for 
certain compensations therein named, and the contract contained 
a provision that Peterson should not engage in the same business 
for twelve months after the contract should be terminated for 
any cause, in the territory in v/hich he worked while in the 
employ of the company « The emplcyn5en$ was terminated on Hay 
33, 1915. Shortly ther':;after Petersen entered into the same 



I business in the same territory, ar 



I enjoin him from 
Thereafter by leave X- cour 
on September 13, 1915. 




pany fiiei a" 



ansv'/ered the bill» 
mpany filed an air en led bill 
of Petersen, it was ordered 



that his answer, filed June^^^, 1915, to the original bill, 
otand as his ;-ns-.ver to the/ amerS^ed bill . Thereafter the appli- 
:;ation for a temporary/njunction 'i^s heard upon affidavits 
^jresented by tlie rss/ective parties, ah^ the temporary injunc- 
tion was granted./The af "idavits were pres^ijyed by a certificate 



of -av ij^^xc»^r-aa ^- i -s-- a n-ixprrgsl 
:he bill 3hov^;fe^ia 



The bill shov^r^^ that the office and principal place of 
business of the company was in Chicago and that it ir.aintained 
a branch office, and place of business in Peoria. Its business 
i* buying XKi selling and ielivering teas, coffees, baking 
powder, extracts, spices, cocou and other like merchandise. 
It sends agents to homes to solicit orders for such mercnaniise 
It has a scheme by which, if a custorrier orders a certain amount 
of such goods, the customer receives certain ether household 



1 



.0SS8 .oK .nsO 
98lX9qq£ ,^r[£qmoO jssT IswsL 

.cfnjsllsqqjs ,ixosisd'9l .T .A 

fcallj-^o asJljsnxsisrf ,,nd£rf-jsioqioo i; ^^n^qmoO jssT Isv/sL odT 

.^ *T -A rfcMvr grri^txiw ni d-OAi:faoc i; o;tni beisias i^a^qsaoo 9n';f 

"xoi £l'xoi-39' at cM lol essnisijcfnjtjst'rsci xio 'iir^o o& aoazeisl. 

Lsai£taoo ;to-5Tunoo gx'lj- tn^i ^Jba.ijjsn n'xs'igxl^ axxoi*£an9qmoo nijsd-ago 

easrtieucf sm^e srfd- ni ssjegns ioa tluoda xioeisrf's^ ^fisrld' noieivoiq £ 

10- fcsJ'^r.imTSu so' LIuorfa io-s't&aoo erld isd'l£ 6xl.tnom svXcwd- rot 

9flt ai gXirfw i)92[iow ed rfoinV ni ^loJiiioJ- srli- r.l t©e0£o y^-^ 

Y-g:.' no baisalsnei^ hbv; ^rrsmYoXqitia 9rfT .^^J^qmoc 9rl:t lo YO-^^ing 

9(K£8 grf:?- o*nl JbsiscJ-ixs asaasd-s'5 iscMi^eaerfcf ^Xrf-tiorfa .^LQl ,SS 

0^+'"T!rtTrTrT¥rrT"Y£!£qITOov-9rf^^^^ «>Yiotxiie;t gm^e ed:!- at Beeatsud 

.Illd sdi l9*iowaa£ tnQsretel lajs. gnxot oa^ xno'il mirl nlo[,ri9 

Xlic' I'stcisfn^ !££ fcgXij; \fnj3qma0 9flo tCfiuoo Ip^gv^sX y^ iSoligiQilT 

i-3T:ei:io ajiiv ti ^a.eeis&Ql loSio x&osijtC .5X9X ,oX igf/mgrf-qeS xio 

.XXid" Xjinigitto srft oi" »SX9X »'S;^/9ni/L Leiix ttswenj;; axxl i£di 

-IXqqa srij- TSd-l£9T9rlT . IXid t&ii^mjBSsrfc!- ot isvrs.an?- airi 6£ tnx;^8 

sd-ivsf:!!"!^ noqx/ iji^eil e^' noiJ-oxix/tn^ Y^-'S's^OQJns^ -s lox nol*£o 

■ / V 

-ofii/i;ni YlJS'ioslfcs.t 9rit t<f£ ^eeiiJ-iiiq 9vid-o9\a9a 9iij- yo toJcrgagtcq 

5J-i3oiii:*'Xs^ j£ Ycf f;9y^€eeiq sisw s;txvi3i)x' ' .l^sd-fl^ig sisw noit 

..^4«'feir&-'ih5rft"TH?nT'l-^9qTjE-nj^ ex -e-JttHP— «^©xi3i;XV3- Jo 

to 90£Xq Xjsqioniiq £n£ eoXllo 9rf;t d-anJ^worfs XXid 9r[T 

LanXjE'tni^fr^: tX rf^.lt X)n£ os^cirfO nx &sm Y^^Qii^oo Si^^ ^3 segnXaud 

SKsaisucf a;tl .^Xios? nX aesaXaLfcf Ig so£lq trc£,©cX'ilo xlorusid i: 

SaXrfscf ,3991100 ,a£9;^ sJ^-ti'-^vXXst ta^ gnXXXsa tex ^nXYJ^cf "^i 

.9eXtn£rioi9m ©iiX 1^rI:^o taii iiocoo ,Ji9oXqa ^8&0£1^xq ,i9twoq 

, sciLajBrioieo! rfo^s lol aietio ilotloa oi Barrtorf oi aS-ng^x: aXaga il 

c^rriJO^fIJE iriJEtigo ^ 3^9X10 'l8ffio:^suo ^ li irfoirfv; \6 araarioa £ ex^rf ;*I 



rrierohanliee as a premium. ltd agents have horses vir^i wagons, 
and each agent h^s a specifiei territory to work in, ani when 
-. custoiner has once been secured, effort ia male to retain 
that custoiner ani to secure "uture oriers froin the saiir.e party. 
Each agent keeps a bookcontaining the name and oriers o' each 
of his custoiiiera and so.-r.e data as *o the amount of trade of 
each custoiter. Such books also go to the office daily. The 
bill is very full in details shcving how complete a kno.vledgs 
each agent has of the custo:r:ers on his route. The contract 
vith Petersen contained the following clauses: 

"Party of the second part further agrees that en the termination 
of this contract, or upon leaving the employ of the ;arty of the 
first part for any cause, that :he will promptly tuen over to 
the party of the first part all books of account, papers, orders 
and all other property belonging to said party of the first 
part and used in the business of the said party of the first 
part. 

Party of the second part further agrees that he sill not 
-^t any time while in the employ of the par.. l;e first part 
solicit or take orders from or deliver teas, coffees, baking 
po'.vier, extracts, spices onA cocoa to any of the custoniere of 
the party of the first part, for hiTiself or any other person 
or company other than first pa^ty; also tha.t he will not within 
..I periofl of twelve months after leaving, for any cause, the 
service of party of the first part, for himself or for any other 
person or company, solicit or take orders from or deliver teas, 
coffees, baking powder, extracts, spices or cocoa, to any of 
the c stomers of the first party in the tsrri'-ory in which he 
worked while in first party's employ, and especially agrees 
not to interfere with the trade or business cf the party of the 
first part as now transacted or carried on with its customers 
in said territory where a party of the second part has been 
working. / 



nsrfw fns ,rri 2tiow od' \rottii3i i-slllcefefa .B^'8'eir-~Jrr8:g£ iIojbs S'rrs' 

ni^itsi of ^t£;tn' Bi' t'tbJ^B ^beruoeG nssd sono e£il' isaioi'sijc s 

• Y^i^q sirans srfJ- moil aistio six/^jj'i etcifosB o*' JbiTjs""ifimoiJ'Bi/c d-srlt 

dose "^.o aieirro Lhjs sm^n 8rl.t gnJtnl^cfnooioocf £ sqssi Jasg^riojea 

do etjsxd- 1o *njJOftr£ ©r'-^ o^ b-b £cfjst eaioe Jc^i^ 83cs|no*qjJO 6i|j1 1:o 

9rfT ^vList soll^ft >i.-. w- o^ oel£- aipocf ilouS^ ^lemoteao'Sos^ 

' ■ ..■...:... ->.- ., -^ :.-::■: ,:. o^'f jL-eiej-nt ,vr:i:jtiOO Qri 

sgtslv^onal £ ©d-slQffioo, nod gniworfa elijsd-sL ni IIjjI vasv ei Ilicf 

- - ■ •'-;.■ i ^5 ft '^■- >■' -. ;. ;ii; ', 'Te:^ no v-ij.cct .TosTeisI 

cfoisudTtoo sn'T .sJwoi eid iio ajBmo&aito, Qdi 5p e^xl irtssfi xfojss 

,. :asau,£lo, sniwcXI,ol, eri* ^bsrvas&aop ngans^aS xf*iw 

noid-jsni-mttaj-, .srl4,,,xip* ^f^if* jaeazgii^.TS^.d'^atfl &rsq^pp,op6a_^B£i&_^ ^p,y^t%3'i\ 

r • -■ ' ••:■■-'*■ '-:' .....'^.•? Hi '{'TO fix 1-0+ Vrld' .1'- <oa:j..".D va^ 
oif 19V0 t xmujJ-.TjX.lQfttOxq .ftliw srfc^^rfd- .^aaujBO y^-s "lol itcsq Jaail 

sisiio ^eiaq^q »d-nuoqa^, .Iq, ajfooo' XXjs J^:t£a *.az.-t^l e^jJ" ^^p-, \[*-5^q, srf* 

^aaxl &d^ -^o vj^jsji Jbi^a q* gxifgnolso' v^Teaoiq aaifJo IIjs fcn£ 

tbitl fii-r- 'o Y*''^^^ btse erfcf ^o aasnicjjcf srfd" nl tsai/ fcrue it'a£q 

' . i 'i " 

,*ijsq 

d-i£q gaixx- arid- lo \;#X£q.^sr[d;, -lo Y--. lirfw smid" \;.-_ w^ 

3n2:it£cf ,a99llLpQ,,fca44Sd- rttaivlXsL ao ilw... _-..^_^ S2i£d- 10 d-ioxXoa 

lo axsiBO^auo ^xfJ^lp .yhjs q.iJ;^ jjC^^op *?)(i a.eolqa ,,a|fqi;id-x9 ., jTati^oq 

aoaxaq X94*o •cxijs to :^-ttaicxxf ^xqI . «t.?;"^Q ■+«'^r'T srfj; !to, Yd-x^q sri:f 

rtxrid-iw ton llt\'i '■■-■ ^^^,^^.+ oaXjB^iyJ'flEjaQ i'axi- 'isxicfo Y^^qffloo re 

srfd- t9e0£o vn,. .__ 42niV£9l is.+ ^.~ Bdiaota .evlsv,i lo-Ao^^sq • 

nerfJ-0 Y^'i- io"i 10 'tlsatcX-ff ioj ,;tx£v: ;_:.-- sdt lo Y^^-^q ^o aoxvTsc; 

,8£aj- lavXXel 10 moil aiario 3:;i^:f to iloiloQ _^\a^zmoQ iq floaasq 

lo YCt£ o* tJBOooo xo e9o£c*3 ,awO£iJxs ,X9Lwoq -gatiBd ^aaalloo 

sri iiciiiw al YiO'^-i^'^s^ s4^ «-t Y^i^s'^i ;^6ixl adit . lo axstnod'^ c 3:'.' 

898ig5 Y-f-tJK-tosqas tcts, , YOXqms 6 ' Y^^-^q Jaiil nX 8Xi£fw tBiio: 

sxid- lo Y*'^"S'3 8^^'^ ^!3 easnXaucf 10 et^t* 9ri;J- ri:fiw 919^19 :fnl 0* ton 

eiscEO^aao aj-i rfj.iw no X^sXiific 10 fcaJojsan^x^f won cjs (fijsq d-aill 

t-trf BMd &tAa LfToaae sff± ^o vir^n b aisrfv/ vrto^finisd' Lx£e ai 



/?= 



Party of the second part fxirther agrsee, as a conlition 
precedent, that he will not dirsctly or indir-ctly through 
hi.Trself or Others, take avvriy cr attempt to divert any of the 
cuytom, business or patronage of the party of the first part 
with its customers in said territory for a period of twelve 
months after leaving for any cause, the employ of the party 
of the first part. 

Party of the Second part further agreed, as a condition 
\ precedent, that he will rot engage either ''or himself or any 
[ other person, persons, or compe.,ny in the tea and coffee business 
nor will he offer for sale any tea, coffee, baking powder, 
extracts, spicesoi, cocoa cr other ff.srchandise during the life 
of this contract nor for a period of twelve rr.orths after the 
termination of this contract, for any causS, or after leaving 
Tor ^ny cause whether before or after the termination: of this 
contract, t~e employ of the first party, in the cities of 
Peoria, Lacon, Henry, Chillicothe, Illinois." 

The bill charged that Petersen had full knowledge of the 
customers on the route which he had and on one ether route, 
and ':hat upon the termination of th-r contract he entered into 
he same business and travelled over these routes and solicited 
trade in the same articles with customers of the company, and 
sold each customers like merchandise. The bill sought to enjoin 
I him from violation of the agreement for twelve months from 

the termination of his employment, and alleged two grounds of 
( jurisdiction, namely, t'.iat the company could not have an 
^ /adequate remedy at law, because it would be impossible to 
ascertain how much trade which belonged to complainant he 
J withdrew for his cvv'n advantage, and how much trade he had in 
(the company's locality, and also because Petersen was insoleatj;* 
The proof showed that Petersen circulated a business card, in 
which he desctUbed hiT.self as formerly manager of the Je.vel 
Tea Company a ] 



e:^:f lo Y'^-c^ d"isvii, o;t cl-qms:fcl'£ zo: xsv:^ Biat ,aisr{d)6 no lleemlrl 
svlsr;? lo Loii:sq jb lo'i x'^otliZQi ti£.a az a:Isa;o:^eac aii diiy; 

yni; 10 llssmxri lo'i isriJis sgjQ^rrs Jon Iliv? sd iad;} ^iaetQopic 
sssn:iex.rcf ss't^oo in^ £ad" eilo ci V-^-sqtwoo to ^aaoetsa ,noaT9q asrfto 
tialv/oq -^nxiisc- ,s9iloo ,J33J Y'^'^ sl^ja to: iqYio sd lltvi icrc 
slxl.adj -gatiub aailn£>doto:t< isdio .zo £Ococi ,iseaolqs ^aiO£ztX5 
srfj- led-i^ 8xl:tT0!n svlew.t lo tciisq ^ aol loii ioiiztaoo Qidi lo 
g.Txv.sel i9*l£ TO ^S&UBC x^^ "^o"! ,tojsT:fn;oc sidi lo noi&sciltsrat 
sidf lo iioxd-.eniasTsd' ©rfcf Ts^t^js to STolscf z&diedv 9auso vrrii Tol 
iO asitic sdi fix ^^i^jzs^q iazil edt lo volqms s'j" ^ios'ifaoo 
".eionilll <srf;tooxl£in'0 «y"i*^9K .noo£j ,£lToe*I 
Kfi;t "to e^LsXv/onx IIi/1 iiiXi aeeTeJ-a'^ ijid;^ p^e%zsc'o Hid srIT 
,8^i;oT Tsxllo siTo no tn£j fcjsri ed rfoxrfw s*ifOT Silcf no zzexois^uc 
Oj-.ix i>6T8;ta9 sn .ifo^Td-xioo exi;?- lo aot:^ sal !s.zs& sdi noqi/ *Bnc^ i>it^ 
le^iolLoe L^b aecfuoT, 9se£i+ tsvo beLlevBZ^ Laa aesniaacf smsa 9ri3 
ba£, ^vn&cElOo edi^ lo BTsmod'eJuo dtivi ealcloT^ sraj^a sri:^ nl &ti:zi 
nioQns o;t ^frigiroe Ilic^ sfiT .9altrtsdozsai ailil &Teino^aj:jc rfoua Iloa 
moTl sn'onom svlewt toI drxamssTs^ silt lo noxtf^Ioxv raoTl mid , 
lo atrujoTg ow;f tagsllx ta^■ t^flscKYOxqme airf lo aottsnlaizBt ed& 
n£ ,rV£-iI oon tXx;oc y^-^^^'CO srlj- ^£i";;t tX^sm^a jrroii'OxfcaiTL'-t 
Co elcfisaoqmi eo' LLuqv; j1 sei/jecsc'^ ^w^I d^x; y-^S'^si &t£i!p&t£\ 
6x1 dnonijblqmoc ot Le^noleo' dcxiiw stx;TJ ricL-ai vrori nxjstTsoe^ 
.Tx i:£i: or: sLzzi doum wod i rrx- ,9g£ct-n£vt£ xrr/o elri toI wsTtrfJlw 
«;t4fl»Ioeal b^: nsaTSd-.r4 ©ajjjsoscf oeli?. ta£ ^x'^lZiiOQL a'^ruExvaroo srf* '• 
iTi ttT^o easniaucf ^ Led-x;Ii/oTi:c neaTsd-e^ ^£0;^ taworfa locTq en'T 
lav.ft"^. arf* \a la-nRrrpm vlTBiHTo'i e£ IXesaRlrf Lsdilftoaai' ari rioiriw 



•.vrit of injunction in tl- 




It is contended ti^t the o/'der for the issue of a temporary 
injionction was erroneous, 



use the "bill lii not pray for a 
er for process-. The till contain 

the following! "May it please your honors to grant unto your 

A 
orator the People's vrrit of injunction, to bo directei to the 

said A. T. Petersen, defendant, enjoining and restraining him 

during the pendency of this suit from" (here follow the ietails 

of the inj\inction desired,) "and your orator further prays 

that upon the hearing hereof a temporary injunction so issued 

shall be rriade permanent." A prayer for process follo^7edJ '^^— - 

are ofvcpinicn that there N^as a jyTay-r for a wr'lji of temporary 



:hat it is notXjrendered invalid beoa^bise the 
;he bill iidz-^c-^put the prayer for six-r.rribns 



injunction) 

person "-^q 

in tl\e same paragraph bu"to.n the irisxt. 

The order foKan injuncticnprovi-ded for an\injunction bond 

i'.vith ssecurity^HiO be \pproved by the clerk of the '^court^ whereas 

■the sta^tute/ (Chap.SS, S^.8.) requires the securitjf to be ap- 

'proved byy'the court, judge\or/nia9ter» It is argued Vnat for 

that reasoil the injimction /oxder should be reversed, This error 

can work no injury to Petersen ai-fi the obligors cannpt escape 

\ / - ■' \ 

liability on tne groungl' that the bd<id was not app;.roved byVhs 

proper authority X Thjg' court below canXremedy the defect upoi 

proper application''^ O'Beirne v City of ESj^gin, 187 111. App, 5^1 

I t--iKS--^'©.R4-®«-ieji-4^t^*<;--t4i«?'=^^ grant eii" an 

injunction after an3wer^firB4. Tiiat depends upon the nature of 

_t;gs:i22ISj7Sr J The bill had a copy of the contract attached to it 

as an exhibit. D?,fend£int answered that it was not a true copy. 

He did not point out in \hat respect it v/as not a true copy. 

He did not deny but what it was a substantial copy. He lid not 

deny that it ."as a true copy as to any part thereof rflat(=ri:il 

to this cause. Wf? r n g ji^ f i ■ i -b . t^hTir . - :f n r ^^""g HIgL'igffht; - -it-*- 

He admitted the raking of the contract and that it was terminated 



7 



\ / \ 

L ^ ^ ^ 

/^ni^Jnoo Hid 9riT I, ee«ooxq aol -xeitJ**iq ekrf^ ai noij^om/rnx lo *±Tvr 
- — ;J ~ •^^'-^o^' 

TijpY orf-rof ^a^-ig ojf Eionorl Xi/oif ss-csiq d-i y^M" igniwofloi. arid- 

ffilii 3ninl,6ad'asi,£ifi£ gnlnioQixs .;trr£tn»x5l ^aseisue? .T .A iiljBfi 
all£;fsl: sri;* wollol sisrf) "raoal . :rli- "io Y^-ccstiisq sx:t sniiuJb 

fcsuasj: oe noi^ccwtai: ■^ttisioqmsi js los^sr- snxtussr: ar.'j noqu ^jsa'd- 
— ©W LtoniroIIql aaaopiq ap3: tts^^iq A , " . *nsn*im5sq s£i£or scf IXfirfs 

Siid- seifjsos-'f ilXfivnl battsLneWj-on ax tx ;tfirIo»i»nBv6oxi-onu(;xix 
erjomrrjTS lol iSY-ei<i ^-^^ ^ijq/iforfs^iL Hid sxii- vf^xli oiJw noaasq . 

+xarlh sr£* nl'^ii/d ifqjB^2£iJ3q sjttjea itfitrr«i • 
jbnod nqxrf'Of^Xfli/'.a^,.'!- . ^voaqnox^fcnxi^nx njSr/^Oi isfiiTo sriT 

-q^ sd od- 5t*-^iJ^09a sill e&Txxrp^T .(:.>-^./q^'->e8%.qj8rfP) V^sdiJi^^ 
lol \&d-j h^is-^is. ex j-I .a9*e£f2>,^o/93fcjL;t t.d"T.i/oo e.nij- /^d ijSVoaq 
^ro-iie sxAT''\.l;sei9vsi sd iljJxirfa T9±;eb vnoxionjutnx sii* /Hopjssx Ifidd- 

/■ ■ '' / V / 1 

edy yC l)9T0Xqc£ *ofl ^,ew ti>6.d sd^ J-jsxi* jwiuois ^i^ xxo yifxXicte^X ! 

/ \ "' ^ ^ ~ - - ,^ . _ , 

looi; Jo9l9X friit if^em9x/xi£0 woXsd Jiuoo an'T /^d-iacrfd-i/^ asqaic ^ 
.185 .qqA .XXI T8X ^at%^ lo \tiZ v enaxgS'O^^noX^^siXqq^nsqoxq \ 

"io ©ixTo^ri Qxiit noqif eirxisqst *^riT;;-*^j('ir5L leweajc x^it^JE noiJ-ofn;(;nl j 
il oJ iJ9rfo£.d;+js ;to£i;tnoo grfu lo Y-Ioo JS-fejBiI XX^IC". siiT I TSTTEHErs^ 
*YhOC 9U1? £ ;tofl 8J3V.' d-x t£>i\-^ xsiQwanii J-ai^as^^O .d"ldirixs re, 8£ 
.^qoo sjJidf ^ iton a^w j-i Joaqeai ^jerivt^ ni iuo d"nioq Jon til-gH 
tJ-on tit sH .YQOO XjBiJnjed-adua *> a^w j-i ^jtiiiw J-xid ynst *oa txL gH 
XfiiisJjBin !ko9T9;'.+ Ji^q \a& oi ^u '^qoc SiJiJ -a .'Bjaw d'i t&At \a^t 
-■ '^loft ^ir . ftxals- ttcri^ 4i - * ^ » '*g ai oW .eayjeo ain't ot I 



\ ani that lie had jone into the same business ar.i nought to trais 
vith the customers of 'the companyi t-drr"oi which was^tT^-A^lnla- 
tion of the portions of "Isi^ contract abo^.ye quoted. Tha con- 
tract provided that PetersenNas the;?€'oy employed, not only $o 
take orders for and deliver ^nd a^l teas, 3tc» but alao 
"to perform such other duticsy^s -^he p«^ty of the first part 
may from time to time specify ani requireryf him,"lThe bill 
showed that vluring the term of his eraploym-nt and after a 
conference with the officers in Chicago, his duties were changed 
from that of a wagon man and route arent to of ice duties in 
the branch office at ^eoria. I Petersen contend^s that that change 
was an abandonment of this contract and that;he was no longer 
bound by it and could enter into ti^.e same ttade in Peoria vyith 

the customers of the company at any\time .after leavins; its 

\ / 
employment. We are of opinion that tee language last above 

quoted from the contract shows that tne / change made in his 

duties was v-ithin the terms of the con't'ract and that he was 



CA 



C 



still bound thereby, / \ 

Pete^sen^ contends that the "cSi^J^l a^eges the cancellation 
and -eciaslon of this contract li.r.l^Jfe is^^Tais^eby relieved of 
its ob5figatKcns= / ^^g^ paragraph of the bill i n.^;' i r.**bi o n -- alle gs 
tiiat on or about 'iay 33, 1915. in consideration of il37.50, 
then paid by the company to Petersen and accepted by him as 
the payment for one week's salary in advance, "the aforesaid 
contrcLct of employment of the defendant by your orator v/as then 
f^and there terminated by mutual agreement." / Considering this 
paragraph of the bill in ocTw^tion -.vith all/ its c"^her alle- 
gations, it is clear to us Ahat iV^means^^Lat Petersen' s\empley- 



ment for the company was jserminated b'j^J^i^utual agreenjent aM 

The en-6dre bl. 



not that the '.vritten conl^ract was abrogatf 






is an effort to en.^orce/cert^in p/ovisions of t^t contract \ 
and the company did not mean tp' charge that the contraci; was not 
in force ani not binding upon Petersen, but exactly the contrary 



3 



o;^ Xiao -ton ,t'©YoXqms yio^srij aj^nf^eais^al t^sit i-stivoaq d'ojsij 

Ilic sffT l^eiHiri lo sTii/pscc txije y^^®^^ amid" Qt^scuiJ moil .■^£ai 

£ 15.*1j3 bas tasoi^oIqaiB aid lo iai5^ ed:t gctXTjjit ..ifB^'t tgv.'ode 

fcs^iTfirfo sisvv esxitui; sill ^ogxsoxxfO ni: sieo illo , sdi: dt i^i sonsTslxioo 

nx esijir^ fsil5o,oi-dfa8g« -.f^foa; |)iij3 rifiin xio§jsw /, Ic t^rlt moil 

e-ga£do S£x{i tM& spaB^aoo neB'iots^l^&i'iOQ^.tseoil'lo doa£i(i 9xiJ 

iQTiciox on a£W sxf' *«d# fcflje d-aijai'aoo airfJ lo taesmota£dj:>.a£ ,3-S9 

dd^xw jsii&s^ tti Qb.B%t ej&sa ®r/d ojrix leins LIsjoc La^. J-x xg bcuod 

Bit gxilvjssl Tsd'ljs, sralj- /y^£ d-jo ^n^qffioO:,©^^'-^© aasmod'exro sn'd' 

©voefjB .*8J5l 9@aij§jEi^I js|^d^,^jsf:d-^pin lo st£ sW. ^itHsmTjoIqine 

Bid rrx sixiw egnjsrro \ oad" ;^JB,rid■ ewcxis jOiiid'noo arid- moil bsioup \ 

ejBvv ed i£d& bn£ tosi^aoo edi lo emtceit sM ,pi^_dtf^-^ ba^h Beltut \ 

• YCfsxarfd- t-iuod LLl&a | 
xioid-^IIeoxiiso ac'd- csge'lfM;^ j^cf Qdi ai)fled-noc N^jf^d'.sl , ,. ^,^ / 

lo fcevsxlsi Yc;3-i«rr?^ai: sTb^xuj ^x)J3ti:d:,n;oo eidd^.lo. no radios j ii%e • 
yC^sg sIIjs xi-©-f4««cc:;irrri: iXxo sd:. xy riq^is^BiJsq J^ \*axioAd"J6i^!Mo ed-x 
.OS.VSl. lo noxMi-siJlenoc nx .aiex -^S^, ,^-eM d-jjocfx; zo no d'.exi-iJ' 
e£ mxri x'^ t)Q&q,3GO£ ba& iteeietsH ot >{ni3qmoo sxld" xfi bi-sn ns.-fd 
i)i:^e9icl£ srld" ^eonjsvtjB nx \'a-£lo':.e a'slsew sno aol d-nsm^f^q axi^ 
nend- asw loiffiio ijjqy Y^f d"n-sfcnalsl! srld^ lo d-n&mYoXqxaa lo. *a£id"noo 
sxxft gfli-ieticrfoO \ " .d-nsmssigji; lisuJursi ifcf t&d-jsnlmisd:. sxaiid' fcxte , 
-sU/: -rsrlro ad-I sll^ xf*iv;- aoi;to^0oo ni Ilio' Si-d, 1:0 xtq£i§£i£q 
-•^olqme ,fe'aeei9d3^ d-^a'X ^■"•eS'V^ '^'^''- >^^ °^ i£Sxo ai dx ,anoi*«3 



Lnz; ;fns:n9ST[S3 X^ird-i/ajKY^ Jbsd-^aimisit a£v/ Y^^-sq^oo 3xld- lol cfnsra 

Lltd 9ii,d-n9 9riT vd&sd-^goi-cf^ ajBW d-oxsitnoo ngd-d-ir;; srfd d-osnd- ,.,4'on 

/ do£a*noo t^i lo anoiaivotq ni-^d-iooi8oiolns od" d^rolls ajb ai 

foil 8J5W Jo^'icfnoo 9rfv d-^n'd- eaijsrio od- njsern d-on ixl ^in.eqf^oo and- La& 



I The answer denie^, that the employment was so terminated and 
declare^ that Petersen was discharged, and that unier another 



clause of the contract he wi.s sxtxlciBl then entitled tc thirty 
days additional pay and iid net receive it, and therefore, the 
company broke the contract and c^ assert- no equitable riights 



under it. It i)S4^ not appear that he ever claimed any additional 
compensation or expected that he would be paid anything further// 

and we are of opinion ^^^t theT company is not precihuded from 
enforcing the provisions herV^^lied upon by the fact that it 
has not paid Petersen scn-iething vmich he has not asked for. 

Counsel for I^ersen suggest that if vve Ic not reverse this 
1 order, the tejipcrary\n^ unction will probably remain in force 
till ':.'ay 23, 1915, and t^^e company v;ill thereby have all the 
- Enef it of a final iecree \n its favor. It is equally true that 
:he denial of a temporary ii^^Wiction -.vould practically preclude 

/ \ the company from any equitable "Xslie^' Upon the admissions 

'' '^ / \ 

.f the ansv/er and the showing mad^^^in the affidavits offered 
^y the defendant, as vyell as by the 'oomplainant, we are clearly 
of the opinion that Petersen is viclati'^g his contract and 

'hat he should be restrained from, so ioin^ becaue-e it is ;tianif* 

r^st that the dair,an"es v;hich such violation Xill inflict uoon 

\ 
the company i.7ill be practica.lly impcssible of ascertainment. 

'\ 
The order is affirmed, \ 

Kiehaus, J, took no part. 



adrfgiii sXcfsJijjpua on iisee^'^ifiap Ln^ (tOBXi-xioQ .©xfl-jaaloicr vnjsqiaoo 
Ii;noiJ"xtti5 Y^-e i^sfnislo T&vs 9ri iJ^dd" iX^a^qqjs ion J^^i^t JI_.,;ti isbof^ 

moil tobsjs&oBiq ion ax \in£qflioo s4J $;^j|f aoiniqo- 'io ai^ .,e^^i)xii^^ 

,toJ i)9:faj3 j-on e^.-i erf aoxitw §nirid^9mo§,xige,29J.8^ ii^q ton asd 
aldf ssievsT iton oIj sw Ix Jjsilci- ifas^sxre fnssisi;^,, 3o5'.l9sni;oO 

©iffd-.sili- svxrf Yd9T$rfd-:.XXxw .Yn*qfflOo-s^- LnjB, t.SISX «SS y-s^^- J^-^i* ' 
i^ad* Buii YXX-eups Bx tl . lov^Srlt. a.%U &^^9j&;}OBt . : tilen^d 

9LjjXo« iq- tX-I>B»xto«5q;;&JUi:{»ii?ifna:i;i'0ray|;xiX: %^£i;Qqa&i 4 So jC^XngL.. 8x1 J 
enoxB8xflibj3:i'9atte.iiogU ^\qlL^% ©Xcf^^Xapa-jiCff*^ •nK)i5 ,Y-ft"^3^0- s^'*' 1 
X)eTt9lSo -'e*XVjs£)^lYa..ve3Cftiv;ax j^|)j6m,gQlT/^ 9il;t Xn^ -lawe: c 

yXtc£9Io 91£ 9v.' < j-nxirixjeXqmop' srfJ- ^cf a^i XXsv/ ££ » Jn£f)n9l9t, axCit; ^^^ 
La£ i-ajsitnoc aid gcfxJjsXoxv ax naeaeJ-a^ j^i^nt noXnxqo srfd" lo| 
<%lnarn »x :tx 980x:o9cf .:^'iSioXi oa moil XioaX-eiJaai 3c XXxiorfa srf isAi 
noojj JofX^fiX XXl?ftf\iloXd-JsXolv x£p.x;6 doXrfw e93-BKi^.,s4d" tiSxl* *^^^ 1 
, Jrrsrnfix£t-*T90.a'£ lo .sXcfXaaoq^Hi yIX^ox*o.. --^^w ynosqmog 9,xJ^ ' 

.Xiamixlljs-yex.t^S^^o S.;T 

.J-i.jaq on sloow -^d^^VL 



\ 



I 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, [ 

SECOND DISTRICT. i ^^' I. CHRISTOPHER C. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the o]iinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oflBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of oui' Lord one 

thousand nine liundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice. / 
Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justice. '' 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk./' ^ Q Q I«A» 17^ 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. / 






/ 
I' 



'% 



BE IT REMEMBERED,' that afterwards, to-wit: on 

the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office' of said Court, in the words and fig^ares 

\ 
II 
following, to-wit: % 

/ \ 

/ 

/ 

/ 



'' '.7 



i i ,1 u y . 



10 ^Yf'JIUa 



Gsn. TTo. 6163. 

Axerican Slscl & Co.:p&r Plate Co. 

appellee. 

vs Acpsal from Du'P-at^e. 

H. !i. Eiltdx, et al acpsllants. 

Ca,rn 2 3 , J . 

fon Matt 35, 1913, H. K. Eiltcr , his -.viie and t/.vo sons, 

Raymond R. Bilt=r ani H. C. Eiltsr, the tour ste^^^iiWs, wsre 

living as one family in a r^aiJsncg owned by H. K, Filter in 

Elmhurst, Du?>-.:s Ccur.ty, Illinois. Ke also o'vned i farm cr about 

3S3 aorsj in the sairs county and .if/vs in.^elotsd to oartiea ctfesr 

than 3b-p^«4ia£. In amounts agirej-a-'ting $b4, 550.00. On t.-^t date 

"in~ /-£^...-t;// 

su.x.iionc was ssrved upon him xa a oon-iaon l?/.v suit by the .J ippQll e-e, 

American Steel and Cc;per Plate Company. Four days thereafter 

for an expressed oon^-idsration of one dollar he conveyed, hie 

wife joining .,ith him, all said real estate to e ild two 3cna by 

deed that was duly recorded. Toe common law suit ■rought by ^^ — 

ii*iie* terrr.inated Octocer IS, 1S1;5, in a judgment a'-ainat him 

of C-i^3.31. Execution i^juea tl.are4n, "iind he filed a achedul© of 

his ,;.:.r3cnal property ahcvv'ing a valuation of less t'aan hie exsrtp- 

tions of ■^^00.00. The execution wa,3 lt-.vicd on ail tlis real eatats 

BO conveyed and a^-f^^^irl^e filed its bill in equity in this case in 

aid of he execution. I- sues --vere joined, trie cauas referred 

to the .raster in chancery v/no r sported the evidence vith his 

conclusion that the prayer of -"he bill be granted. Objections 

and exceptions to the raster' i* re-port .vers ("iled ^nd ov-rruled, 

and a decree ent3-:-ed aettin.r: aside t-e convsyanoe and subjecting 

the property to the lien and payment of the judgnient and execution, 

frorr. .vhich decree this a peal 1st- proaecuted. 

The evidence ahowS^'that the r:al consideration for t . s con© 

vey ounce wae an agreement in writing by the grantees to aijsuaie and 



.93Jb-?u3 moil l£&qqk «v 

.ecfOElIecgB l£ ci? ^z'iilZ ... .... 

jerroe otii bas sllw eiri » xsiilE ... ... ,-x,x »«.-. ?-.!.; .:C ; 

©isw ,8ee-£i«-t^ "u/ol arid- ^Itd-XlS .0 .R Jbn^ is4Ii3 .H bnom^^H 

ai T9»H1S .H .E ^cf i'onwo sons-Meei £ nx ^Ilawl sno e£ gnivlX 

rf-i/ocf^ iO. sn&l B b^nv'o oeXs sH .aXofliXII t^d-iwoD eg^'^ya ,faxuaraX2 

T9^*o e9i*i£q oi- ised-cfstax a^w Jbajs x*^^Oo srajse 8ii:f nX ii»ao£ ses 

9;f£^ tsrii- aO .00.0S2,*c:| gni:^j?,s9ig3JB Biauotas al jaaXX*^^ ajsdt 

, s eXX 9 -^l>g. efft Ycf^ iMue -w.^X nocp.inoo * ax miri xioqx; iavasa 8£W anoiMiJje 

airf »Jb»Ysvnoo s.rf i^XIoX* sno lo noXiJ-*;asLXiaoQ Xiseesaqxs n., -^ ^ 

YO &no?x owJ- £)J:j.a oct- aiti^^te© Xjsai £iXjsa XXb ,iaiil dti^ gnixiXoQ sliw 

— %5r YcT tii:auo^6 Hub m&l nommoo sriT .babiocsr "^lub ajsw i'^iit i>d8ii 

lo eXjjXisa'oe jb JbeXll oxi Xjn;: » ait'© a Slid- l>difaaX aoltuosxl .XE.S^f^l lo 
-q:Tt5Jca eiri aAdi «s®X "io floxd"JSXjXj8V jb snlworfa ^iasco'iq X£noei3q aid 
a.j'jatae Xjeqi sil.t XIjb ao J&aivsl ajaw noxcfjjosxs sa'T .0C.00i>J-lo anoitf 
ni iaajBo eirf.t nX x^^^P^ "-^ XXxcf. aJX bi>Li^ 8&fi- . . ^- i)9^9vno& Cv 
Jjsaie'isT eaujso siii ,ibsnXoQ stsw asue^I .noxvDocx; =>i: ' lo i)i* 
aXrf rfd-iv' oorrs;.jtva 9;'v+ teitaoqaa oriw ^i^ofl-fi^'C -- -^ sdi o* 
oiioicfos tcfO .ijscfn^ag ©Q" XlXcf sri-^ lo isif^iq sd,} i-isxlit rtoieuXonoo 
,i>©XjyTisvo X)flJ? X»eXXl 9TSW ^loqai ft'isJar-ii srlS- o* encl' J eox; .-. 
5^i;tc;s!;cfI/a fc'cije ooni5YSvnoc ©i-J- ©i>ii^j; :',nid'iab X)9-ici-ni ., 

--•- ^ ■ ■' - noilxiaMeaoo X£:i odi ijsdi^'^wocla ©oneXlVc. -1 

« tt tt .4 rv r- 'fv. arf-t rrri -n nr f + r t v.- rr f- .+ rf^mea'TTn rr.R o rtW *nrtJ-:V 



pay the V efore .rsntioned indsbtednses of -their fathsr to parties 
otliSr than 'ar-Be-l-ir«^; that the jrantese undsrstood that f.s tranafsr 
covered all ths real estate and personal cropsrty cf their fat":cr. 



the real estate from v.'hich the .rabtsr round t>at at thr. tirr-e of 
ths transfer the fair oaah value of he rsaioence in Flir.hurst 
was ^'6,000.^ and of the farm i!;4 5,4JD5.(>€ making an aj^^sgate of 
|51,415.'3'5> A -^p^ii^a*- ev-i-iem:j«- — atrpported- the i4-nd.i-ng, arftd/^o 
eviaence to -:.ie contrary waa introduced sxcent it was shovjn, 
subi ;ot to obijection, tr.at the asss^^sed valuation o- ^he crcperty 
"or purpoaea o~^ ;;3niral taxation v/aa Izca than '•he amount agreed 
by the p.^T'^-J^'tses to be paid for it, iini the grantees tvstified 
that at the tirce of he jtsxxssstxsit transfer t'.ey arrived at 
■the value of ths property by a co'xputation as to ita net revenue, 
and ths reeult was about the amount t^ey a?;rsed to r)ay fcr iti 
The pr<iJi:Tty had a T.ar.cit value, .E^?iie«^e----rs--t^'^tlT3~-3;s"BB:3:9Bd 
valuatioi^x was inoompatant and ir-rat ".rrqil (Lewis v ITngle-vcod 
Elevator r\r. Co. i33 111. ioo; Kelly vxPsople'e Nat'l. Fire 
Ins. Co, 131 '"-1 11. A'p, 142.) ^^aithsr can rt^rr.et value os aacer- 
tainsd by philcapphioal cofr;putation8 of -hat p-i;;opsrty ought to 
be ^vorth on a basis, of revenue. Tvsn on t:ie question of intrinsic 
Value net revenue is 'only one of 3&y»jpa4r-xru i .' a i d:* vj, t i t j ng . The 

master -joncludel that the air.ount ac^reed to he oaid by the ^-rantess 

" I 
was aoout 45 per cent of "hs value of the property . A-=-f^elriraats -• 

/ ingeniously argue that the evia=nce doss not satisf aotcrily lead 

to t.'^at conclusion. It '..may bs> had thay aesn fit to introduce 

ooapetent evidence aa to the r.arket value cf ■^ha prccsrty, it 

would have a\oe-..red that t -.e g;'ri''nt3e3 -.vsre agreeing to pay fifty 

five >er cent of it a value. The exact er cent is not very 

impcrtant here and quite lively for ^hat reason apoellants did 

not ~o further into the rr;atter. There is no question but that 

any j'^^ir invssti ation would hive resulted in a showing that as 



sexct-i-.r od" ierfd-£^ tlodf lo e&znsj&izzLL'.l tsrcoxj id: ■^jsq 



A, 

/ • ■ 

.Tstf^jG'jt Tlsrlt ?.o rfi-asooia IjsfioaTett'i/rjs a^juJ^s lesx eilj- XXi ^slevoc 

^o emld- srfrt ts i^r'-i biuro'' ie:ta£m siij- rfcirfv/ moit eJ-jcitsa l£9i srit 
tBtudxll at sonsties? srf to euXcv dsjEc li^l sfii ■x9'iaajBir;f eri* 

l)ssis£ chm;6mj3 zcii CLsdi easi eiiw rfoif^xjsi' I?£T3'n£- lo etsoqiaq ro^. 
bBl'itt5^i assd-fi^'i^ "srit £n£ , jl loi Jbi£q scf o;f esscfxifis 3xit -^rf 

.di/nevsT Jen e'^^i oi bjs no2*£^x/qtcoo £ ^^cf AfJwCo-iq exit ^o si;X£V 9dt- 

.tl lol Y«eq ocf ijaea^js ^©:rt Jm/daie ©riJ* tuOcte e^w Jli/asi srfJ txr^ 

£> gyj >-ag ax ai U^ ^ . Jgx- :^ oxtc^^ ^aQ: .fiyi^V rf'^iaiiiTr is Jb^rf ^ftisj^lbiq erfT 

JboowsXgfiS V alwaJ) X^it£Jirrf.i jbitjg "tnatsgaiooai sjeiw iroi*«iJl£V 

Slit .X'*j3^ a'elqosV'v X'^^sl (CSS .JCXl 5Si .oD .? {^ io*jevsX3 

-leoex ecf exjXjsv j-S-iit^m njso iS£f:Msli!' (.SM' . .1 X31 .09 i'Sfil 

oisniicfnx lo not&isup erf* rio nsvS .eifnevai ^o ^is^cf £ no £fliov i- 

S-fT . gf 1 J f J ET r fc r g i f otrHH»»»y« a lo ©no ^xno^ 8i ejjnsvsi ;f9r: sx/Xj^v 

iisstnxij^ srfj- ^^ttsq &d o* i)9aag£ JrujOJH* arii i^^rft Esix/Xonoc tsSBM 

--e#ajB4-X3^^ .XiJ"i6coiq srfj'lo auX^v eii;J lo i-nso isq 3^ ;tuocf£ sjs* 

JbjseX yXlToi'oilald'isa ifon aaoh aoneclVs efll *4&il^ at;gi£ \rXejjoln&snl 

eoJJtoT;J'nJt oi il'^ nssa y^'- ' - '" .ajxauXonoo *£r:;t o:f 

o-i i^fiiqotT Bci-^ ^o OJjluiv -- . ^: 6.1 eciietivs Jns?9viaroc 

'fj-'i: ■^jcq o* gnlaoT^i: etevsr t . 1:. - . , svrri Jblxrov 

YT6V *on el tnc ; .s^iiV &tJ: ^ j;i£c leo ovl" 

L- s^afiXiec --^ sxoi -' •■^^^.t.-Xl stixjp Jbn^ eie.i Jrusti:.- - 



to :^..-.croxir!-;r.t8ly half i.h«^ 'market value of the property it was a 
voluntary cTsnr^yance « 

\ Ths grantess t^atifisd thsy did not, at the time of the 
trariaTer, knc-.v cT their father's ir.debtednessi to a^=i^eii.-s« and 
thers i% no direct evidence that thsy did then know cf it, -^i" 
thougtir-eens^ideri-n^ the relation of-t-he-parties and the^a;: oarent 
purpose t^ trar^^Ter all the\ fath^' s' property to his sons on 
their a cuniing all hia dsbtaV^cept \7hat3V9r mieiht be found due 
: from him to appellee, it is^ taxing credulity to believe that 
the grantees had no knowledge or nctics that there :?a3 a saait 

p c adijiig-l&y-tippei l6«-a>gain-a4; tialr-f a ther . 5-fee-^fe^?€tTrsiitrt^t«i--snr0Tmt e d 

I r \ 

to an asilgnrnent for the' benefit of ail creditors except apoellee 

ith a voluntary rri^''^ over to thr assignees at about half the 
oiarkst value o" the property 'a3«irgHa«d4 The parties continued 
to live together under an arrangement, they' say, that the 
"itaer should -.vork for the grant ses for his board. 14 i s t yanifo &t 

.-at it would be much as^ainst equity and g?od conscience to perait 
appellee to be in this way<^def eated in the collection of \7hat 
we must regard a just debt, a.~^ ■.■je do . not think there is any 
I j rule of law or ec-;ity that ahoul^ have pre-aented the chancellor 
fro.r. entering the decree v.'hich a common senee of justice de;T:anded. 

It i3 argued by appellants that the grantsea paid a consid- 
eration for the land; that the fact cf relationship gives rise 
to no presumption oi law r^.gainat the s^icd faith of the sale, 
and t/:at as a rule to render a sale fraudulent as to creditors 
of the vendor there irtust be rtmtuality of anticipation in the 
fraudulent intent on the part cf both the vendor and :-h5 purchaser, 
and that the burden of crovin,- the conveyance fraudulent wae on 
appellee. These propositions cf law are supported by s^jthority. 
It ia true tiiat a coeditor in failing circursitances iray deal oith 
his relatives, and if there ire no indications of fraud no 
presumption arises rom the relationship. Schroeder v Walsh 



' .5a* Wf**-?^ Gt''a8sn£s:f&fe£)f£i'6»isH*al iris- .n^ ,i8'i6n£i* 



flo 8ao3 aid o&x^te<ia't(^'s'ts^tRi:%'d&''llsi6iesij.- QOQTuq 

d-ixjs ,s e^w ot9ii& t^i i6'6t>^fi lo e^^is'iwonir on bail 13 9il;f 

. erf*- ^*3ff- *ir©cfe *JB «iS9ftgi^e.fc : ",.13 ' Yxeitnulov £ d^lr 

d-ee^3^tffj9««r-#i--^I'-\'3bT«cd'~er]f'-Td* §&ed^ sriJ 16I irrow Lljuoris -isrid-^l 

ijidvf ■%»' aoii&^ll'QQ'-td^ ' At 'b&t£@'i:eb\^&rf a la 

to Ll Qc asdo edT ^b'QitiQTS^t<i Bvcri 0tic j w^x So eLui 

,bebaGT.eb ssltsui^Jo ©en«e ao^mcc a' ssioet sricf gnlTcsd-fia jnoil 

-tierce- i; fclr-q ieBa-ftB*|''''$K:r'*i5-MU Bd-n^IIe- 

eeix 8©v1;b qirienolJl'^IST lo" tc^'5: orlJ ijs'rtd- \bciBL eiit loi noi:d"£is 

..,•!£« Sri* 3:0 £tt£'i boa's eri-t 'tf-anli;; . : . .. o* 

eio:^lber6 o& ea d-ssXi/fcw.f-T' Ln^ 

9[ii at ttOt&£eitotta£ %d TjtXX-Eud-utR/stf &eium &TQni 10c/- 

fltoajsw tneXiTti/jgi^ sonsx^vs' zs 

»vitTiodtrJS ^d bBSt^'^i'^aB sije ttjsX So anoxjt-xaoqoi.; .©©iieqt,.;^ 

,>£> Y*tH eeon^tdlrnuo'iio gniXiali: rti'tO' . si cM 

on b" ' ^9VJt*£ls"i aid 



120 111. iC3 is citri in suvport ci t'.:at cropcsi-^ on. Pu'^ the 
court said ir. t':ii>-t case t.:.at rsiationahip nriay excits ijuapicion 
and ;ray be ccnbidsrsa v,ith c-thsr evidence tsndin--; to inr.peach the 
traiisaotion. Parhapa thi; ruls is t".:at if the trf.ns'-.oticn -vith 
a relative is oae that rr.igut naturally os preaumsd if ■'"hs rsla=« 
tion had net existed, 'I-ien the fact of relatiorahip uoss not 
matter. In the creaent oaae it cannot be reasonably t; ■sau-nad, the 
convsya.nce would have been uade en thoae tp.rrr.3 to one net a 
relative. The inadequacy of the consideration crbids any such 
conciadlGn, and ia o£ itself a strong inaication of fraud. 
It is s-iid in 20 Cyc -iil - "Inads';.uacy of cor^'ideration is i 
fact cabling for exp^.-^nation, and therefore a badge of fraud 

'especially when such inadecuacy is gross." This text ii supposed 
by iiUivxrouB authcritiea of Illinois ana otner states, and is a 
correct expression of law. It aoes net Tatter vvhether ws say 
fraud in fact or xraud in law, and it rray be doubted whether ths 
fact ti,at either or ooth of "he parties v,'3re ignorant of thii3 
debt -/.-ould oe ccntroxling. If th^ actual consideration h-id been 
the one dollar expresaed ii; Ihs d;:8d» and the grantees had kno.vn 
/^ of none oi 'xie indebtsdnsea of tneir father, the conveyance, of 
I course, could not have stood a._,ainst cuch creditors, and there 
is no squi tabic reabon why it should stnnd aeainat appellee in 
, this case even if it had been true tnat the father 'ind his sons 

* all for ot about the debt at the tiir.e the tranafsr 'vas i^.ade. 

I It appeared that the granteeo had paid sorre of '*"he indeb- 
tedness that they assurr.ed in purchasing ttie prccerty, and it is 
su^restad by =i;:ceia.anta t^.at they ought to hiVe been protected 
by the decree as to such paymente. The answer is that they asked 
no protection from the court. ?'e reed not here determine .hether 
they vould be entitled to any. 
The decree is affirirsd. 

Affirmed. 



/' 



©rft tu3. .AoifisoqoiD. iAiii 1o txoqqus at oeitz, ai lOh .XXI OSX 

noioiqeij-E eJ-ioxs Y~'"n qXiisaoiiJ'^jle.T J^nj se£o J'^xfcf ni 6J:b« (fiuoo \ 

Qd& rfOJBsqarx o;t gfiitne* sonsLivs isJto ilifivv csisbianoo ecf icjb-t btx£ 

d&tv^ aotio£@n£.zt sdi ti i£^.c:i aX sXjji sdd^ eqjEdie? .noi^ojsefljsii' 

-fiXei ©il-^ IX issenufisiq so' xJilstsjt£a ici-^im t^cii sao pi evXJijXsi £ 

^fon asoJC qXrfsnoXJf^Xei lo iosl Bdi a&di ^JbacfeXxs d-on tsa. 

9rit ^be;i)us&-^:a Y-i-t^-enoa^si scf cfonrteo tX 96£0 Jnsaaxq ©rid- nl .a&uJjbia 

.8 *oa ©no of enj'xs.t aeoiiu no a&Ji-T nsad" ©vsrf JbXi/ow sonjc^svaoo 

'->-'#i5x/fiTl- Ic noxJ^oiJLaX anci:fe £ IXaeJ-X lo e -: ^Xonpo 

*-'■ si noiJ^isbisaoc "io ■\jc^J^P9-t^"I"-'^-.-C^^ o^O Ou iiX x-iio eX tl 

XiU^ilrlo ©stj&d js 9iol3ien'* on^ «flox*aBa£lqx© lo- o io^l j 

XjffioqqjJB sX *xad gidT ".saoTs el Yo^^P®^*^Jt rioue nsnw Y-^-'^'fi-^os^QS 

« er cn^e ^aetB&e tQdt^ bajs. •ionxXil lo isXJXiorftjjje muoiatma x<^ 

Y^s 9v\' xafAsd^ a©if#j5rc ^on 3so£> d^I .wjeX lo noleesiqx© *csiaoo 

©rl?- r9dti>d7i b^idzsob ecf Y'Sm dx tas. ,W£X ni £)ju.3^jt'' lo JojbI nX fcu^al 

" - Btxtvf T:o rf'xijsiofigX ©lew esidajeq erit lo xlJocf 10 tQd&is t£d& iO£\ 

nseo b£d aoit£isbtsiioo X/iiJdojs sxid 11 .gnXXIoid^noo ©cf fcXuow i-cfsX) 

CTwo«3f fcfd «s&tnj37g ©riJ xirus «i)9£t ©4^^ nX, Ijdaeeiqxs usXXoX) ©no exit 

lo ^so^J5^i5v^oo 3rit «i©rf*i5i tXsriJ- lo saented'CfsXaX adi- lo ©aoa lo 

sisat Jon,6 ^9%Qt i tstio dou a tunls^ boots avsd toa bluoo ,sa7i;oo 

-^ jrX ©siXeqqA tar.i£ge basii^ bLuoda JX ^rfw nosjssT 5ld£d^xjjp© on ex 

©noe siri bnx a©rf#£i ©Ad d-jsad" euii need Jbjsxf d-i.li nsv© ©e-eo aidt 

.•L£m •£«' t©l©n£Tt Bdi esoti sdi^ t£ tdsb 9dt iiiOd£ (fordol XX£ 

"*cfeLnX ©rl.* ^o emoe X)XJsq fcjsri asednJcig ©d* Jjsifd l3©iJ36'7c.. dl 

aX ti tf.£ ,^ieqoio ©rfl gnXa*,iioiijq at iiemifeeje ^srlj- t^nd aaeni-sd 

jbastoed-OTo nafd ©VHxi od" cfrigi/o. ^^erid *«:x?^ e*njBXXs'-j;-.£; ^fd Xistasssija 

f,e^«£ YSfft .^jMii. a!; Towerijs «rfT .ad-asitYJSq rfox;© od B£ saioeb sdt ^d 

t9if9dyn ©^X.int©*©jb ©i«4 ton 6©©a ©?r .i"i«ciLO ©rid' moil floitoad-oaq on 

,^ni^ od bsXdxdn© ©d XXjjov ys t 

4X;SiTlTlll£ aX ©©T0©i5 ©riT 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, \ _ 

SECOND DisTPJCT. \ ^'^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuppY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, iu aud for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, no hereby certipy that the foregoino- is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my ofBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine huudi*ed and 



Cle7'k of the Appellate Court. 



^- 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 

Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presiding Justice, 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice. 

Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justic^.Q "^ A 1 ^Q 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerkl 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. / 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



k:." 



■T -J o jr ■;) ■{' 



Gen. Ko. 6i:3. 

Ralph Jester appsilaiit. 

va At eal frcrr. °':crii.. 

Da,vid S. Las, ap.:ellee 
Carries, J, 

Api'>^lla^ji:, "^o-lpii Jsater, cl^.-inied that ;.t ^ae rsqusst of ,/ 

\ 
David S. LaeAthe a;,:sllee, b= croou]?'6d a isurchaaer of a business 

property of a'ypBsllee'a in the city of PecriS'^ and was an titled 

to 1:777.50 oomffiisaicne, and brotight this suit \lo recover that a- 

nioiii-.t» A trial by 'l;Jio ccuc-t -.vithout a jury reBU-^ted in a judg- 

ment fjor the def endan'^^/'f rem -vhich thia aroeal is 't'a'-.en. 

The procerty in --lusation was in 'i'^pt ember 1911, occupied by 

t"be Minnesota Threshing Machine Company as a ^snant of Lee, and 

by the Hart Foundry Company, a sub-tenant. Jestsr was not a real 

estate ..gent, but svao manager of toe P3oria hranch of the Thresh- 

ing\ Machine Company and in charge of rneir businssa triers. Som- 

queatiodaroae as to the use and r-aoair cf the building. Jsatar 

and Lee discussed that rrj^ttsr on Sspterrbsr 21 or ^*, 1511. Tn 

thsir tsstirtiony t/.sy agrel^ as to .vnat .vaa said at that rseting 

and diff er-'^only as to the date -.vhsther the :51st. or 32nd. In thia 

talk Lee suggested that ths Threshing '-^^'achins Comcany ought to 

buy the .:roperty, and Jester rtpliej that he Jid not think thsy 

.vould buy it but that ha intended to visit the factory at 

Minneapolis soon and .s would suggest the rrjatter to ■iTsn:. Lee, 

either at that conference or thsraafter on that day - it is not 

iriaterial vvhioh, wrote on -a slip cf paper tl-j.e figures 1143,500.00 > 

and handei it to Jester an as his price for tne property. 

Jester aftsrwarda '.Ment to Minneapolis and saw the officers of his 

company and iiarned 'hat it -.vould not buy the prcpsrty. He 

tisjtifie^ that he ■ ot back from Minneapolis Septsrr/oer 27, and 

thinkirg t..at the Hart Company might buy the prorsrty, he spoke 

to Stacy B, Hart, an officer cf t..at company, about it; that~^ 



■ ^C'iLii .On- . rraO 
.^IiobT rnoT!!: iJSS'-qA av 

,1, ^&sa1J■0 

-J3 *£f(cf viavooei 0?/ Jiije eirid^ j-rigjtNj^id baa ^aaoi/exmiiioc 02.VVV$ o;f 

'i:a csicy/ooo ,XX8X asd'atstq^S nl eaw noi^tasjjp ni ifcfisqoiq ddT | 
;■ ,egj lo ta&aaf jb »« ^n<eqrKoO ©nidojeM gnJtxfesinT siOBQaalU an'* 

,9T©rf* S8*rtiaucf T.t«ri-» to agijerfo ni fcnjB Y^jcqinoQ snlrlojeM gnX 

l&ts^X- ."^r- >, : ^r.« 360 srij oJ- «,- b60t£hot&Beup 

nJ V _ , -acfaisj-qs? no is-t^^MT} #4Bn-:J tseejjo^.. ^a^ 

..TPamoO prriffojfe'}/ sirirfeenriT erf* i-jK^f;? fes^aeggwe ©sJ 2lX£t 

.^d-Tsqoiq srfd" xiJd 

,S9J ,•; TSJ-Ji:i: -.,i tae?,-,;.. cn£ ,iooa eiXoqoBenniM 

.- - ifjsfc j"Xi"^:t no TaJli?eisrij io aonats^noo *±:if:? J'jb isriJxs 

..■'j^^tt■t •STi/gil i' . ' leqeo 'io qxti i. no stoi. ,ric!:ffw i&tiQiji-m 

i*! r ■:;- BXSoiV'^. eW-i wjse i;n£ •JtX©qJE8aniM oi Jnew aJbiiswiscf i:: isJ-asL 

••n9d-q«S elXoqjESnalM moi'?: afo^'i to ■ od *.arii laili^esit 
( yi/cf d"j;l3i.TJ ^rcjBqmoO rfi^H ^if* i£,..i ■srt:iLaidi 



afterwards about Septambsr 30 as saw Lee and told him that he 
thought he could find a purchaser for the preps rty and Lee 
said all right, if ha could he .vculd pay him vhat was right; 
that he then told Lee hs thought ths Hart Company v/oulJ buy it 

' if they could .T.ake arran?;en.ent8 to borrow the rroney, ind Lee said 

( 

j all right; that he ~ave Hart the piece of paper L^e had handed 

' him with the crice nr.ar^ed on it anl had various conv£Tsc,tions 

I 

( \Tith Hart about it, and 30:na conversations 'ith ',7alter "aids, 

/ 

(Who was acting in behalf of the Hart Company in the T;atter, and 

talked vvith Lee about it several tirr.es, and that the transaction* 

ended in the Hart Company obtaining a loan of Proctor EnJ.owrsnt 

and pmxchasijqg t.ie property. It is true that the Hart Corr.pany 

did buj it. The deed of conveyance and its acknov.-ledgrr.ent bears 

date October SO, ISll. At the time of tha trial Stacy E. Hart 

was dead. Walter Wilde testified that Hart called his attention 

to the matter of the purchase of the property and handed him the 

slip of paper -.vith the memorandurr. of price on it; that hs went 

to see Lee and told him he understood the property W3,3 for sals 

at the price named, and asked if t.iey couli have credit for a 

part of the purchase price if they bought it. Lee said no, 

hs wanted to use ihe money, but that he v/culd sell to then: at 

the sa-iie price he had .Taae to the Threshing; Company, thereupon 

Wilde applied for and ob'-ained a loan from the Proctor Endowrrient 

and the trada was consummated, ^ilde, testifying for plaintiff 

says he does not remember having any conversation v.ith Jsstsr 

about it, but that he got his inf crniation with the piece of 

paper from Hart and understood Hart had been talking \vith Jester; 

he 4*. not certain when he c^ot this piece of paper from Hart but 

mentionsa iats coa:i3tent .ith Jiist.r'a statea.ent that hs gave 

the pises of p.aper to liart a..d interested Hart in the mattsr after 

he, Jester, returned from Ivlinneapolia September 37, and at about 

the ti.:;e ..hen he s.a^^ Lee at^reed to pay him if he found a pur- 



8ri isdi mtd blot Icijs. eeJ wjse ©ri 0£ lediGsiqeS isjod£- eti^wisdl^ 

jd-iiglT ajs*' i^(:vi mid X£iq bluov «/J -fclwoo sri li td-rfgia XI^ Lx^e 

tl£8 9oJ £>njc 4Y©^<5.T sn;t woiaocf oJ ed-ne.nsgfljBTi* s^fjEic fcXiroo Y©£ii- li ' 

bei^asd b£d ssii aeq^g It© eoeiq ©d-t jfiijH syjss ©ri f£ai {td-gli XXjb j 

»£roi:*.£^ei&v{i90 eiroJi^^'-^^ii b&s tl ^q hs^tax 8oX,i<? 9di-,Aiifi nXd ^ 

I 
4©i)XjtW ?3;fX£S' ri*^vk- eaoli^axevsioc emoa bff^ ^tl iuod^ ^xeH rf^iw } 

«noi*o.b«r[*5;^ fSidjit tsd.&\;b^^ »a©ficl* X^Tsysfi. iti: ^uoojb. e$J rijfiw. ijealX^* ' 
d-netwotnS x«topxf , lo a£©X « ®njtxU£>sf9 ^?^^<4«90^^i^?«6H ©zidiiji: Jb9Jfc>ixs | 

eajcso d-nsmstdXsfoffSfOie a>i: I)!?* s,oaj&xs>T©jPP Xo; *£•©«£>;. e4f.' ^^it-X- t^JC ilis 

■• ■■ 4ie$i- .,S.^ \(mt^£-&Mi. f!44-^tQv< ^im$iy 94&A.iA. ':. *l-^^£ :.«0^ 9:$cioj-c0 &isb 

noitne^i-E, &id,b9£l>&otr&Utmt b.fltl^i?^$6plt\'i iSoXfiW ^b&sb ej£w 

sacJ nsiif fcatnu^ff b^^^ xH^^Q'^^^.^d^ lo^i^asdo'Siuqi ecf io rre*;»-^iii erlj- gjf 

d-j09*K ^^^^fy ■ J.iJ'X-ilo ®.0X?aL 1© iWJba-eiomefli 9rf>t rfjtXw. w<i^q lo <lXXe 

oX^e lol pjsw T{*^sq9/rqvM4,,|^#e;3[Si>i5|/ eri miff iiX©^^ ii.. ssJ tsa od 

tiJassiao ©y^-il tXwoo,; x^.ri*" ^■^-'^i^'^' ..bQsasin ©oiiq eri* t-a 

ton.bt-ce «?•• jajxfofif, x©^^ 11 aoiiTq eaj5ifo5, " , 

aoQsjeted^ .. iiirfesidT ©ffJ c -b£d ©M •©iiq «fli£o . 

•tne.nv/otft3it<«tco5'^ ©£ft moxl ajsoi- £ fi©ai*d cfo b&£ roJ iseXXjqcja ©LXi'" 
^L^itfii^Xq ijolS snlTf^-^^eet ,©i>XXf^ .|>©d^jeinatt;8rroo ««w «i 
•. t©i-8©t ri*i^w nci^aeisvfloc, Yfr« 3^Xv«d asC. n eeoX- 84.(6^,6/: 

{lejael, xf*Xw gfiXiXja* n?ecf fc£,d ifxeH i)coit6'r©^ru/ Jbni *xeH aioi^ aeq^ . 

--< -^ ..^ 
i+xiCf *i£K moi'j: teqeq lo so©i^ teXiij i^pg ©rf.ji^fiWr sil:i^i^ec ioa *i dfi 

J 

e/-^.p ?rf d-«fl* d'fls.Ti©d"£oe. a 's^iJ-esI, rliiiT ,, i-£(^*elc;A9ci 6;|£X ,* »noii*fl§ai 
'd iscfrc&tq^S tXXoqjc;&nfl.iM moii ■tsaijui'©'! , Israel. , 



chaser; but 'iTilde sat^ t'jat he made the a.-\r:lication for ^he loan 
to the Proctor En.low:f.ant after talking wi 'ch Lee and after knowing 
tl'iat they could have Vae property if they rocured the lean. 

Lee, after stating his first interview -'ith Jsater, and 
hia offer to isll the property for .;^vi,5CC.0C tc JsBtsr's 
company, aa^ that he never made any o'-her prcpoai tion to Jeater 
about ©elins the property ex finding a purchaser for It; that 
TJilde oari-e to him the day after his, Lee'a, ."irat talk .vith Jeater 
and inq.-ired about the cropsrty. Lee stated the convareaticn aub- 
stantially as Wilde j.id; o%p«i t^at he su-r^e-^ted to V^ilde that 
a lean iould 02 proourod of the Proctor Enicwmsnt; t'r-at the nat- 
ter was tii-sn up a..:d procseded tc tna sals; t'lat Jcster naver 
said anything to him about the Kart purchase until Ootcber 10 
when he caire into his office and r^aid 3orj.t:iing to hin-; about the 
Hart people being about ready to ri.ake a aontract for the -rcoerty / 
tiiat he -T.ade no an37/er vhatsver to the 3Ueee:7tion, ani that was 
the only time that Jester said anything to hirr about the sale 
of the prci:«rty except .vhat was first said about the Threshing 
Machine Company buying it. Fa,oh cf the parties ^ ccrrobcrated 
to 30.Te extent in his testimony. Taere w ^ a sharp ?.na jir-.ct 
coaflict on the qoestion v.;:etner 'rhe Hart Corripany -.vers >r,oved by 
Jeater after his return from Mi neapclie on Sapten^ber 37 to pur- 
chase the property, or whether they took up the natter vith Lee 
and had it practically arranged before Jsater got back troir; 
Minneapolis, and bef r e Jeater hirr slf clainiS^^he had any au- 
thority to acj for Lee except to carry a a.eeaaee tc his ov/n 
company of Lee's ;>rice on the property. There -*» al3o a air ct 
ooiKlicilbast A-5 :n Lee a'd Jester -.■rhether at any tims Lee authorized 
Jiater to find a purchaser for the property and offered to pay him 
for it. Under ■^he testimony of the various ■vitr.esses ana their 
state rents of dates as y^y rscoilect thsmj^^-^it might perhaps 
have been found that Jsster^s statement was sustained "by the 



ft^ol 9tii Tcol rtoii£olIq'j£ Bdt eiuefn ©xf tecii j^pia sbXl'V iuc j-rsajsrfo 

^ ': V -^ •■ ' e'le^ael, oJ- 00.005.£*| lolt t*'r««10'*«? 9^* ^Xs* «*'^el^o aid 
i&tael .o& no.c* tsoqoiq idri>-?o (jriiH; elijatfi' isvsn srf j^jsj-iit jii^js ^xJf^jeqmoc 

rr&JasL rfd-iw 3fX.e* ^tili ^e'eeJ^^eiri tsils y^Ij sdJ-' rairi oJ ©in^o eiXiW 

-due cioJL^cf£aievnoo suj^ »9d"i!i"s 9sJ' .'^iiQqoTq erfd iJi/ocfje ^otiupni' JbfijE 

■1 ■ 
s, --' *£iid- ftMiW o;t ioites^gi/e &rf tisfld' jftj[^£6 itij- s^XiW ejs Y-Cifii^aisi^a 

•xsvsa tetssL tMdi- {tl&a art* ol- XisDsaoOiq ta£ qy As'rfiit-ajsw ifld" 
* OX 13(^0*00 Xirf-nw e«j8doxuq jf-'ijaH arfcf ^fx/ocfs miri oi snirfd-'(n£ fiijEs 

\ Y*^9Q3i'5 erfj- TOi i-o«aifloo js ti^m 6.t Y-CJ3ai tito6£ ^itiad" siqosq i"i£H 

S£w i&dt has vfloid-e©^:gii« iadd'O* itvetisilw i»-wea5 ort di)B.Ti ©rf >«'rfj 

eX£B ©rfJ oxfoofx; mid oi i^aidt^ias bt&B ' tsf^til 4sd& smi* ifXno es*.i 

gaidesirfT s.cf;f *i/otf£ jbljse tBttl saw ;fjsrfff-#qsox9 Y!*''®'?^^^ srft aO 

ijecf^TQCfOTioo jrf asi*T«q ©jrf* to rja"4wiaP ^^ • #i gn^ ©flXiiojBM 

Ycf Jbsvocfi «'x^isr yn^qacGO ^^ijbH :«ii# lEarf'lsrfvr :iB®i tesup »i(;f uo ioil'ir^ox. 

-ijjq 0* TS aacfmstqeS no eiXoqisaii :xM CBOii nxu^si elrf is^ljs XdcfssL 

9sd rfitiw isj-J-xsj: 9xit qw aloo* y®-'^ asrfj- ,Y^'i<»o:xq dii:' senile 

. nroa'i afojea' ;to» isteeL siolisci JbegxiJBttjB Y-'^-tJtsoitf'O^tq ti b&d bax. 

-i;jB Yi^^- ■fc-firf edy^ml^lQ llsssiXrf TfatfeSS tt'lsls'Ci Ijnfi ,eiXoq£*nni:' 

Awo axri oi- ©s^tasm je y^'^^^o o;f d'qeox© seJ icl to-^ ct" Y^^'-tiori:' 

d-o liJb ^ oaXij- «*- sisriT .x^tQa-^-iz &oJ:tq a^'esJ lo Yfi*'^^'"©- 

b3stiodiu£ ©9J etnli. vrcja Jjb nerijsriw x©t«elj fcfl>s ©sJ nc^wdsBcfporXlno; 

sniil Y-BQ o* Jbsics ^^o i>a« Yi^fsqoacj «/;t rol li^MJitioiJjq M bail pfd- icsda^T. 

•xXbr^d- tiTjB ae6bQC*Jtwrv,tJUO^B4juv eJit- 1«> YSEtPMi:/^ »rf" lafcriU •d'x io . 

fiq5xl,ii?fj d'/Igiai iL^amdi dosXIoo8:i Y^^ «x! aedrb lo etfnorsd-x?ci-. 



c^^ftAa±o:v 'v.^.icrVit. g f fivirjatu a-a — l &tt t "f o r t li^ - Tac^-^H^-artl'T^a foundry 
company's written j^oplication Tor the lean from the Proctor 
Endcwn.ent was produced in sviience -ind bore d^ite Scptambsr ic, 
1911. It f.iao a.rpsarsd that an apprai3e:r.ent of "he prope-ty 'Yas 
T.ade "or the purpose of t^e loan, .uid a ^rittsn report o :' -^'^at 
appraiss.'risnt, which >^FKfc^dat6 Saptci.ibsr ^3, ISll, the acpraissr 
testifying that h2 \'7as enplcyed and cxaniined oha property three 
cr four days earlier than th£ date cf the rsport. 1-3rr—''±rxtTS'-sz), 
thes3£ t»vo papers c.a^e it certain that ihc^/^^X^^ox the property 
to theVlart Como-^r.y -.vas practically arr3'ftge<i beWean Lee and ^ilde 
before jVster got back from "inreapclia S3pt^nibeA\S7, 1£11, and 



before he, \hi'T.toelf , claim^that he had any authority to act in 

\ / "\ 

the ii.atter. ^ith this unmiEtakable evid^^nce in the ca^e the 

natural ccnclusspcn is that Les As stating t" e whole ?r.a*\ter cor- 
rectly and is to\)= bslisved. It is unrea:.aonable to supcse 
that after Lse haa^ oraotioally Arranged a sale to Hart Brothers 
heshouli contract toVay Jestsr a ccr.rris^ion for fin.-ing i pur- 
-haosr for the prcperty^^ Th3 ,ccurt evidently took this viewXpf 
1 ..s situation and did not er^t in ao doing, 

\Thsre is some diH-cussion in a peiiant'a brief about the 
law of the cass, but thare is no aispiSited opae aticn of law in- 
volved, if Jdster is tc be beliaVvid he wae clearly entitled to 
a finding ind judgment in hia f-vcr. If Lee id to ba o.eliaved" 
it is quite ka clear t-at ha was entitled to a firding ind judg- 
tnant in his iVvor. The plaintiff offered three oropositicns cf 
law cfl the trial. Number 3 v/as to the e feet that if the Greater 

\ ^ 

weight of the sv^dence showed a contract to find a purchaser, 
and the :lainti''f\did find a purchaser, and tha aefendancft die sell 
to the purchaser, t;ie plaintiff is entitled to recover the usual, 
ordinary and ouetcraVy coinmisoione. Thiii- the court held. Ntunber 
1 contained substantially the saine proposition but included a 



etxw Da. «J a../ac- Wn^.« xXX-PiJ^**M '^^ W-q^oO t^W^^i.oi 



..„ «.*/!* 3X0*- . * 8«^» .W.,«* « :U.*i^«=«^.« ^"''*- 
. „o.,4» 0* .W^noB^ewV « Vev«X.ci .fot ei *« xXlopi , 

>„''Cb-v aWt io.t rlJffiSWa *™oWt ^X*"10Tq ,94*. W- "^i^ric 

.SnioS w «l Wton\x6Jr.^ TOX*^*X8 8i!i ; 

-nl WAX 4 nolJa9i.-p SsJAqsit oa »i S78iit *iid ,«•-- «/ 
»» i..X«»/. tx«elu .^« »d X,»v.iXe.- .^ =* .X ^•i'*'- ¥ -^"^o" 
-bsvSiXa/ »<; o* bX «a -il -^v.-' .irf «X *n8«8X-t ^f S^f- 
-gSut *ni S'-XWX- ^ o* texnin, «« »ri *^ * «8X<, . ./s*l-, »i -"X 
to ..0/Jieoc,o«;««-i b8«W0 «X*«UX, .<^I^ .«y^ aidflX *n.. 
'«t..W.« »X **"J* *o=l ^ «^ °* .« «.»e»«K .xix.J 8A* ao .^X 
.'.«M...q ,'6«n 0* *=.«*«= -^ i'"""' .cn.X>x4= 8«,?o,"8X?« 
«.. OX j- ft«t-»l.t e« t«. ..,W*<iPt»<l * X«^». Wfc/«XlnXBX. i«} tn. 
.I^JeriJ «voc« 0, beX*<«..X l«*nX^, .^i* .t«^.x^<» .?1. o* 
„...,;-, .tied *~co »d# .X^il ..noUaiw,oa yU*."o iai. ^x^nltM 
,^u.Xo-,l ted r>oUlBoqo.rq 3^^8 *riJ tliii»n^*a<5«a tsni^lno. . 



hoiiing that the plaintiff had "Toved oy -'hs rrextev .-eight of 
evidencs that h3 "urnished t've "buyer. This the court refused. 
Number 3 containsd practically the sarr.e ;roro3it.on as Nurr-osr 3 
I except the reasure of recov:ry in Number <5 wae ^it^,tsd :ia v.hatsver 
I the services wsre re.^3C'aab]y .vortti. The court rsfuesd tc holi this. 

I There ivas no er^or in eithi^r rexusal. No question of value cf 

i 

i aervioes renhered ie involved. There is uncontradicted evilence 

that such services if rendered, v.ere v/crth ncre than -^he plain- 
tiff J3;.;anded either en a baois cf usual anl cuatcrarv c'rar.~ss 
or of reasonable value of -such services* 

The plaintiff oiferel tc prove that Lea and 'he officers 
of the Kart Corcpo.ny -.vere not en 3:eahin~ inss ternia, anc that 
T?7ilde had never talked '.vith Lee about the purchase before the 
j slip cf paper waa given hia by Hart. The court suatained obiec- 
jtions tc queeticns cailing for 'hess anawera, a.nd this is as- 

signed as error. In trials before the lourt without a jury it 
I ia, aa a rule, quite aa ^veli tc /.ermit incoicpetsnt -pueations to 
^ be anav/ered .-.xd in that rray^is get into +he rsccrd, as to sue- 
' ^ tain obi cations *-o ':hs question nd let offers to -.rove ~et into 
the record, .'/hich laat method is ncceesary in iury trials 
-.Yhsre the offer to prove is us. ally .T^ade out of the presence of 
; the jury; but we aee no error inthia action of +he. court. There 
• was no claiai that 77ilde had 3 = en Lee about roe Ta'^ter : sf o: c hs 
y ' got the slip of caper, and one would unisrstand "rox hia teeti- 
mony that he had not, and 7«fhether he was friaadly or unfriendly 
to Lee he certainly dii ro to him and negotiate the purchase kx 
of the prcperty. Fir.ai'F no error in "rhe record, the iuigrsnt is 

af f irrred. 

Affirmed* 

Niehaus, J. tuoh no part* 



£ TSo'muH ejB noci-iBoqoiq smiis sd.t ^Il£cl*o£iq LsniB'J-noo^S ledauyS '■ 
rrevsJ^rfw "ejs teli^i^s aj3w S isdmsVl ai y^svoost lo e-iu&sem edt tqsoxs j 
, 8jLrf;f iXoxf oJ" iebjjlei Jxaoo silT .rf.tiow ^f tcLertoajssi sisv/ asoxvise ■ 

lo 9uLmv lo nQttB9up oW . Xjsawlsi rsdtts al tons oa a^w STsriT , 

sonsfive isdoitjsTi-noonu si a-xeriT .i)svIovai el £)aaa£)a9"i asoivisa ; 

-at£lq erfj nijrfd ©Toai rii'Tow eisw ^ijaieiinai Ix esoivise dox/a Ijb^'J' j 

•©s'ifirfo Y'5t-s"fO;^ajjc bciB Ijsjjax; lo aia^d £ iio isn't 2 3 iaJbnjsrneJb 111^ 1 

• asoiviss rfojje to sjjXjsv elcfjsnoa^si lo xo ' 
sieolY^o srft Jbnja ©aJ t^rit svoxq ot bQisllo VitJ^atsiq, eriT 
' J^rf* tn£ _«Bmi8* «X3t sniiljBeqe no i-og sisv? y'T-e'^oioO. JijbH arl?^ ;o 
erfJ aiolscT ©8,erfoi0q 9d& iisods aaJ rfcHw l)S3lXjsd- ipyj^n bed 9bLl7} 
-osi;db b&ai£tBUB frsjoc eplT .it^E yd mtd nsvig asw laq^q Ip qlXe 
-8JB el aldi Jbfijs ,ai»wenB saarft rol gniXIjso anpi^fesx/p. ot anoltf^; 
;ti ^luj^ * d-uortiiXw d-iuoo srf* siolscf eX^lTJ- nl .ioitq e^ Jbsngis 
'^i 'enoi;tee0p tas^fsqaiQoai *imisq Oit XXsw a£. ed-iup ^Blut xs ajs ,ei i 
-•Ira of afi ,Moo9i 3rit o*ai *ss Bi-j^ew i-£rfi^ at Jbas fceiewenjs scf 
ocfrif *S3 svoiq ot aisllo ^sX Jbn.; aot^esyp arft o* affolJ^os^cfp ni^d" 
«XjBli:f ^tul nl Y^jBee903n el JBorftem d"aiX rfolriv: ,Jbioo£T ::.'t 

^0 <lonse9*rq arid- lo *tro aJb^iBjiB y^-C'' ^ '' "■ -t la^lo Bdi si saw 

©isrfT . Jii/oo arfd" lo adlfo£ e'lridnx iin;; ou .^ja ew d'jJGf iX^J^C ■'"•' 

erf sTo^scr isd-rfjatn ecft iuods aeJ nese Jbj^ri »i>XJtW *«ri.t mijsXo on t^v. 

-i^aef aijrf kiot'' basiarsbau JbXi/ow ano Jbn£ ^itcis:. lo qlXe ad* ios 

XLbdsL'fynu 10 \:Xfja«xi' ebw arf isritsriw £)n£ ,*on iusn" ad i£di ^nox 

x^ aeBdon/q arfd a^jsltosen Jbnje eat •' - ' '■: ifili^tiac sil s&J od- 

el rf'naxatx/t edt ^JbToosi adj al ao i ■ ou . "di aqoiq, srld lo 

* '*"' " .taraiillis 



Of 



Qi Lri:. .ct^ix^q on jfoct .L »ei;x;nsiK 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. i' ^^" I, CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oifice. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate CoxlH. 



I ■ %J 



9 u / 

AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT , 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of the' State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presidiqfe- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice/! 
Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justic|. _ X '- ^ 



^ f\ f\ ^ !' ^ >J 



CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerl^. 



\J -^ 



■i " 



jt 



E. mA DAVIS, Sheriff. | 

\ i 



I 

/ 
/ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

F£B 8 lyln ^^"^ opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ares 
fol lowing-, to-wit: 



?-"^v 






;10, : ■ ' 



,atT^-- 



Gan. Wo. 6193, 

Laura S. Thompson, Pit..', in arror, 

V3 Error to LaSalJa* 

Anoient Ordsr of Gl3an:rs, 5:3. 

D3it« in error* 
Carries, J» 

The- defsnoi^ant in error, Anoient Or.i°r cf ...Gleaners, is a 
fraternal bansfiaiary society of Detroit,, ^Sliohi-an, A Iccxl 
arbor .vaa for:r:3d at. Ransom, Illinois,,,- in 19C9. John H. Thompson 
the huscand of plaintiff in error, was a s':iatsx o'.-arter -''ember of 
that arbor, und a ce-ieJ-it oertifioate for ^1,C0C,CC was i-:3ued to 
hiffi Junr. 4, ISOS, "ayable.'^n his death to hi3 wife. H3 net hi3 
death by an acciJsnt Octobsr "13, I3(t)0. Hi^i .vidow brought thia aot'cn 
to recover on that oertixicate. Oxi a trial by the court ''dthout 
a jury there was a finding ana judgrn^nt for ths iefandant. The 
plaintiff brings ths r-:oord here for rd^isw, 

One dslsnse relied on -ir*- that the insured was ■ ef ore his 
death suspended for non payment ox dues and aaaessnients and 
ther.tfors v/as not at the time cf his death a ■'i,-,fflber oi" the order » 
The "dues" .vere payable 'iuartsrly, and one cf the payments became 
due May 30, 1910. There ffas an aaiee asmsnt, number 90 the last day 
of payment of .vhich was May 30, 1910, It %^ not olai'ned tiiat he 
made either of bheae pay.rsnts at tnat tiire. Under the laws of 
the society the failure to pay dusa or asse-saments operated as 
a suopension cT tne ';:"ffiber, but it '.vaa provided that hs might 
within thirty days, be reinstated by furnishing a o^rtif icat? 
of y'cod health ^rom the regular arbor physician, :hieh must be 
passed upon by the supr-me medical examiner, bu^ that after thirty 
days from the date of suspension he ia ip&l7arred from further 
reinstatement. It ^ not claimed that the insured made any ehCort 

to be reinstated ui'itil the last of August 1910, but it 4«^^_appear 

^ — ? 
that he then .vent to Henry Siedentop, the secretary and tre^surer / 



.oCac: .oK .nsO 
»tEOit£ ni ,'l;+X^ .floecmorfT .2 jbiujdJ 

• loTT-© rri .d'^sd 

ffoeqmoriT .H ftrfol- .6061 nl ^,exonlXII ,mosn^H^£ Jfcsm^o'i E£w 5oc't£ 

^0 ascf.tiS'T ist'Xjsf'c XKiKJ^z -G ep.w' v^oiie nl JJi4a.l£iq lo Ijnco'siiri erit 

oi bBuei-i sbv/ 00. 000, X* tco-: ©rf'£oili'3^90 d-i'!^sn3o £ Jbne ,todT£ ijBrit 

eld tsrr: s?I .9-1-v airf od" rid-jasr; sxxf no<eXcfi3\{£q ,809X ,i» sruuL aiXrf 

fro-'*o'j8 eirft drf^^oid vo&iv. £xB .OiB8X ^Qi lacfoi^pO Jxisfciocje xub ^fd rfl^efc 

erlT .d-njsijns^at srfJ- lol rf-n^'3CJj(; ha£ snlJbnli j&. bjbw siexicf Y^^'t -^ 
.welv^Tc ioj: eiSff biQCzi encJ sgixiid l^i;tni5X'g 
eirf eiols'' ajE?w Jbsiiisai sr.J i-^rirf --eri- no JbsiXsa sensleJb snO 

,T9i)T0 etiS '10 :tedtcsfo js ri:f££L exrf lo smld' s-'f;^- *£ i'on a£w 9iolr?T9ilt 

srfi^osC e^fnsmYJsq srli lo ano JboR ^x-tis^i-^-J^P eXdJBY-"^^ sis?,- "aeufc" gcJT 

X£i^ *6i»I sdi 09 ledmun ^rf-nercse S6g£ fffi bjbw sisxIT .OXSX ,0e y-^ *"-^ 

811 *£ir+ ijemijcic ton.ei rf-I .0X5X ,0c. y^cW ejr.v? ifoixlT; ^c tas:ax.3q lo 

^0 aw£l 6riJ lefcnU .ami.t :tj3.i:t J-b erf'rtsT.Yjeq aesxfd lo tsrfJis sijem 

a£ be&B-tec^o e^nsmeiiae^JB to aewr ^{£q oi ■ eiuLi£l Bat \;;f9icos srlcf 

tn'glm srf tsni cetivoio^ Si?'?; .+ 1 fud ,i3cai-rr sriJ 'o noxansqGjja £ 

9:fj3oi"il;tTeo fi •anirfeiniijl y^ tQis.&b!iiQi &6 ^BX£^i> "iii-lii-i alclSt^ 

Qr^ tsi/rn ricln'r ,n£ioi6Y^q Todi^ rsiij'gzi 9di- moi'i dii£':d boo-g lo 

\irliit iBi'i.B tsrli fisd ^isnl.iicxe Lszttsta emQique bdi- ^d c\0'\u besesi^ 

ledi-rul atotl berijat^ tt sd xxoiaasqewe lo 9t£L edt moil ax^st 

Viol's "xas sb£m bQiuaat adi t-&:ii JberalfiXo J^o^.M tl .tnetaots^ieclBz 

ia8qqJBl&«^ *X ti/d ,OX'ex d-euai/A lo *ajQX 9di llirui Jbecfjs^anlsi so o:t 



0- tlie looal order, and oifsrad to pay iiim ths ielinquent aaesss- 
msnts and Jusa, and asked bo be reinetated -.vithout ':urniehing the 
required local phyaioian'a oartif ioate j that there then waa no. ■,,•-. 
local physician, but deceased -vaa told tnat bhs company wouldxi,.., 
accept the oerti'icata oi another phyaijiam, naming him. 
Siedentop apalied to the company to reinstate him imder those oon- 
ditions, and the application was refused* Plaintiff claimff^— %ftd"^ 
f hQgQ i!r -^Tir»sft aa . --t 'Sn d i Ry" fa '< >- " 8 Ui -. !yux '' t Lhu Jlaiiib that the insured 
paid Sieientop the money re quired to cover the jelinquent asssia- 
mente and iuea. Sieicntop t:3ti:ied that the insured iid not 
pay hira any itoney but offer 3d to pay him, and hs told hirr ae . id 
would do the oest he could ?cr him, and report the dues paid, 
bat he did not think he could in 'hat .vay be reinstated and ffould 
not take his r.oney until he kneiai more of the inatber, or ao'r.ething 
to that effect. J T he court wao abuadaiiliy JU i atlf led in Ci ffdi t^rf .^ 
ffift^ftrif.npLg. - ^tnf fl>na ft»r----rrf— -^^^wJH^^i.^*^^ U nd er 't haas fc act a. 

d a o ir --vrrs'^'rto±--~se^t'heii?&^T~~xyt~*fhB~' 
of "hi a d ' aa ^ iu Hi-3— t^l-uee -t«-^ay~.Aue^ -**B4"as&e««T«zrt3"-3ttt-OTB»M«trirly 

(s u s^:! ? n d »d~felHU- He coiild not oecotr.e reinstated i-ithcut complying " 
with 'hs requirementa orv ths order unleas somebody r;ith authority 
.waived those requirementaX And even/were it to be found -^rat ?ie- 
' dentop, as aeoretary and tr^asure-lr of the local order, received 
I tiles© Juea at the tirre of th^^.i-equgsted reinstatement, still .. .; 
-inhere is no p^rcund fo"" claim^n^that it operated ae a r -instate-- 
nient. It is clear, whithe;f Siedentop took the money or not, he 
advised deoeaaed at the %i.m& thatXit waa doubtful v,hether he would 
! be reinatated and it must depend on \h3 action of the superior 
lofficars of tie compjuiy. Natioral Council v Dillon, BIS 111. 330; 
'Schsiber v The Protected Home Circle 146\I11. A;p, 574. 

The contr?.ot of insur^n->4' ia this case, as is usual in auch 
societiea, included the cehat^ution and by-liv.re of th? society /. 



r 



-easae^ trtQupaiist zdi mid ^^q oi Jbs^sl^o JfcnjB ^tstio i*.-L 9-;j ;o 

on e>ew nsn'J- ©:isrf;f.*jBf!t jed-jstoillifaeo K'n^iclsyifq l£OoI iealirpsi 

IjIuow Y^jsqffioc srfc; ^jscfj bZoi a^>' •bBdcszQC iud ,n£ioia^£iq XfcoX 

.mid gnitT(j?n ^auBicisYdq isdifonii 'lo s^jeoiliJisc srf;t tqsoo* 

-noo ©8ori;f zshnu miri ©^f^cfenisT: ocf ynjaqmoo scli oi tdllq,q£ .q^oiastolB 

/■' '■ 
~~'fcfH&-^*.mij£Xo I'^iialfii^ ^Jbsuulsa e^w fioi#£OiXqqj» srf* Jbns «eaci;tit 

-e&e8S£i JneupniXisS sflit levo© o^ ijaiiup si Ysnom.- sn* qoJ'neisiS tisq 

Jon biJb Jbeiuani eri.+ i&di isi'iiJe:^ qoJnstsiS .esi/i Jbnje s^tce-t 

•^' «ff miffi feloi* srf i)n£ ,miri Af-eq o*>.i;etc3l*o :fi/cf ^eno?^ xaa mid if«q 

iii-isq Esiffc' erfd Jioqei ta£ ^miri lol tXi/oo erf d-gaicf tif^ oi) tXu&w 

. fcXuow fcnjs Jbst^d-arrieT ©d i{£w*Ji!ri.1 ni.' bliroo' ©ri iniil;}' ion lib ^tL ietS 

_sioxi-& - • wj , fr b^ t --fre-!^ j--»<HB f»gfi-4"-6rfi-»--^gr'-# n % m&i ^t i t-lrp i rr a i a I B 

'/■ gni^Iqraoc iuoA^U; JbsJjrd'aniei snrocso' *on ijlilroo sH -» miri -ba j e n s q «JL f fl \^ \ 

/ I 

-Si8 *€rf:t Jbnxrol ed o* ;^i e^ew^^ave JbftA /.etnsmsTiijpeT eaodt i)«vjta«r. 

Jbevi©oeT ,t©£)TO X^oof'-srfd- lo seii/ejc/id Lnr >:ijf1Sto66 ex: ,qo^ns.i: 

Xli;J-a ,i-n9rtre#«*eni«i i»e*esl/p^^^.^'dt ^.o emid- arit ts: eewi: ©esc*;' 

-a^J-Jsd-Bni'c'i «a bjb fcsd'JBrreqo cfi J^iftl/^w^iBXo -'^Oi- Jbm/oig on ei sis:.'' 

9rf 4*on 10 YS'T^Oft" Si'i^* iood- qo^05isiS -xerf^grfw .ixisXo ei *I .^nsir. 

JbXirovr erf isrfi-Bxfw Xi;ld'duo£) ej3Vf il/i&Si emi"ii^ srfcf *e ioaseosL iiaeivijjB 

loiTsqira ^rfi' \o ROi.ioj& self ho ijnsqsi) iu^m it tnjs ta^^ianiai 5"' 

;OfiC ;XXr £X£i ,noXIia V Xiarax/oO- Xjtj.ioiJiilf .Ya^moc srfcf lo aiaoi^' o 

'''i' ' ■•;,*V8 »qqA ♦XXI/a^X aXoTiO ©moH JbeitoeSoil sriT v TSQifcdo3 

rfojjs .ti X^ai/etr ei a.-;? »e8j:o sirid- ni Vn/^ifani -'io *&^tr*noo srfT 

Y!^«ioo»-?rf.t ^0 awf^X-Ycf JbnjB noid-JijJ>i4erhskp erfi^ issix/Xoni ,«oiiteiooe 



1 ^1 



?-g44.-t4 a « ;1> e-. The certificate was o.-fsred in fvidsncs 
by the plaintiff and treated as Taking a priTia faoie caae.-I^-- 

i^jojii jity » l l' i --' /defendant took the deposition of some of its superior 
officers and i.ropoundsd various interrogatories as tolDooka, docu- 
ments and records, and copies ox sams that it wislisd to uas ir. 
egidsncs. Thi? :;laintiff did not arpaar at th3 taking oc the 
depoaition, anJ cbiects here that a su'fioient foundation was 

_ not laid for the in'- eduction o.' tr.e 5Vidsnoe. Esfors the trial 
the plait.tiff move; to suppress th:- ieposition. The court ovDrrulsd 
'•he motion, but defendant stating in subatancs tnat it would 
rather re-take the deposition than havs any question in ths record 
hout tiiat, atipuiated tnat no error ahouli bs assigned on the 

j .^otion of '-he court in overruling the cction to su^pr sffia.-Tirs^ 
j re:roTttr~th«-p-e-i€^-« -stands as- t-h&ugh^jLa.-^u.:^i..;ac^td.o.su:2Ad- ^ -• ■ j^n - r ri a- d ^* 

I The plaintiff, on ths -rial objected to various questions and ans'vera 

' ' '.5. move a to strike out "he evidenco^/ w Aioh objcoti o na an i t- moti o na 
^i -.vou^d probably have been sustained aa tc some of the rat^rial xsroof 
i^i" I he eviience nad been offered orally ih court; but 3uoh ob- 
j actions to questions and interrogatories barinot pr'^jvail if 



barinot 



firot made on the trial. Thai a l£ an old familiar rule and "?a3 
applied in Hutchinaon v Eambas 34S Ij.l* 634,\ 'vhcre the proof T/as 
insufficient as to tns loss of letters, the aontenta of v.'hich was 
c f ered in evidence. In I. C. R. R, ^o. v Foul^a, 191 lii. 57, 

..ers tne answer of the ^•yitriese ".-aa improper as\a statexert of a 
conclusion instead of a atat/ixent of fact. In thkt case ths court 
cited ',-/ith approval Ealkv?i^l v Bridgeport T/ood Fii^ishing Co. 63 
111. Aop» 653, ';hers the' rule was applied in caseVjf insu.'ficisnt 
evidence that a certain day was a ie^;^! holiday. l\j that case, 
citing T. W. 5: ?/. R. R. Co. v Eaddelsy, 54 111. 13, vfoere, -.'ithout 
statin,;^ the nature of ths interrosatories .xnd answera passed on, 



.*:;; :.#l-.eKBO sto^J. £iT.ttq j3 snlalfsm ej3 iist^sii- bos, .'i>ltnl£lq srft ifd 

^tti «fi0 <5* ^srfsiw tt tsrii smss 'lo eeiqoo true ,8Ci:oo9i taxj 6*08.1! 

-•■ - BJBw noij"JBtnjLfol ^naici't^xre " js fziii srrsri e*o9(;cfo £iaj8:.t«oi:fieQqai 

I^ii* ©4* aiolaS .eonsLxve srit lo aottonbo'.ial siii lo^ fci^I J-on 

bsiurtc'vo iiuoo sriT .aoxri-xeoqsfci, exfcJ- eesiqqx/e c* .^svonj liiinl^lq. sdi 

^. bluov &£ tjsdi 9oa&i^B<iiJ^ ni ■^aii-Eis tactneJst ;tjua' ,nojt*orn sd"* 

fcTOoei erit ni no-rf'ssx/p ^njE svsri a£dt noj:^ taoqeb sAi' e:i£i-si i9d^£i 

-Wlrf rro JbsxT^Jtas^ sd £;IiJQds toai® on tjerii bs&slsjqi&B ^&&iii ivod^ 

-,^>nrfT-.B«s"iqqiis o:t aottom ed^ sniluiTevo nx tiiroc sfi 1 -o aol&0£. 

i ftjbiim ff »»# -Jbja£Uixaii:offi.>~rtaija,,,oxL,xf5ixo£t4- -«^- -ai:£L2>*'-*«>^-e^iernr"" :traac»? 

eTSvreftiB £>n« Bfiolj-eeup atfolTCfiv oj tsd'osfid'o X^It: ©riJ ^is^lliicii&iqt^ecil 

looiq I*ii5*£!-r ©ri.t loN,»/no« o* as benl^tBue ased svsri, ifldBooiq -fcii/ov 

-co rfous iL'6 [:itisoo i^k ^IlaTO t9is^*^o need iJSi}' scnsLxvs ?d^ li 

--. !tjt li^-vzrq ioa£i£tl B^ltoi&'soi'iB^^al. La£ snoiutisup oJ- encxitps^ 

'icBJBr t'a£ 9iJJi i£ij.Jpi£l £)\o n£ si o«4riT .X^x-icf tdi no eiifira tertl 

I '-^ 

BSK looaq Biii si«xfvf 4*£c> .1X1, e*>S •^dfjuea v aoaaidoiL'H al teiXqq^ 

/ 

Bsw rfoidv; lo aitned-rro/i sdi ^Bitiifi lo eeoX e£rv+ c;t e«s ;t-flsioil:lx;snI 

u-,Ta«XiI xex .a^Xuol V .0^ .a:\.fl .O .I m .tcasUvs nt i;?asi:o 

'■J '« lo *rfejrst£d-B a/a« isqoaqmjt %-&r: kasnitf: eni„ lo xQf(&a£. e:ii sisdj' 

^•n/oo 9rit 9BJE0 Mi't nl .d^ojeS l;© laexSUij** « lo ijaeJ-enX noxewXcnoo 

68 .«oO gnlrffrl/il'H: JbooW U-ToqasciiS v X^iwafX^H Xj9voicnjf. ridi*- is;tlo 

tttBloil'ueiil iys8£o. ni JbsiXqc;* bsv oXwrN^/::' sisri? «wSS *qoiL .XXI 

,£«£» *£rf^ al .vrcbtlcyd X£g»,X « ejDw )f«i> ax£;*i30 £ *£j-d ©caotivs 

:^;jo»:^ ' I-^.^XXI *S «iceAeJ^-&fi3 v .oO .H .H .W i .W .T snX^io 



/ the court said it is not the prcper praotics to make objections to 

i depositions on the trial of the oauae.They should be .fade ani iis- 
l 
posed of beforr the trial in orisr, if dsfective, the party taking 

their. /r.ay have an opportunity to remedy h3 obj action, and for such 

purpose ask a oontinuancs. Statefir.ent3 that :'.re o jsctionabls 

1 merely because ''"-sy are aeconiary eviaencs nmst be objected to 
befori the i;rial. Cooke v Orns, 37 111. 1S*J li Cyc . lO^C. 
It is of course true that certain clsrjeotions to interrogatories 
and answera r.ay prevail if first mads qv. the 'Tial, but ws think 
the mattsr complained of ir this case ia subs t?.nti ally all -within 
the rule that requires objections to be 'fade before the trial. 
There is no reasonable prssuniption ""rom the r3oord before us that 
anything of '.;he kind ^ot in evidence taat could not have been 
easily made competent by a re-taking of tne iaajts:feisndepcaiticn 
if the questions and answers had b^en hela bad on the -ret ion to 
suppreaa. We therefore will net discuss the questions r-.ioed 
here as to the competency of interrogatcries and ^ns'.vers that 
should have been fir^t raised on tr.e taking of vhe deposition 
or on the motion to suppress. 

j Another defense attempted -jvaa that deceased rr.ade false 
warranties in hie application as to his habit in the use ci in- 

i toxicating liquors, ar.d it Is ciaired tt.at he came to hia death 

I because of intoxication. It appears tnat his v/idow, tne benegiciary 
brought an action ag;ainat ealcon ka-pera under the dram ehcp act 

, for causing his death. The record is not 3U?''iciently abstracted 
on this question to fairly present it, and while the iefsndant 
discu see the question here, it aoes not clearly point out the 
parts of the raoord that he relies on. We reoiard the proof so 
clear en the other -^yround of drfenae that we have not examined 
this question. 

Pro-zositions of law were cfferid on -^he trial and ffiarked held 



r 



- • 1 

o* enoid-oetdo ^"is.^ oi boicfostq isqo'sq ©dd- iton ei i-i fcl^e *ti;oo exfj- \ 
-slfc -tTKiR^ 9!j*m 9Cf Jblixok^ YS^T.sei/jso sifd-' '^o XjBjti;f "exfd- no snoiitiaoqsJb 
^ijf«!j-'iftrr£q '6'ffcf'''V«vlio'"oV^ li ^islitto' nl XfiiiS- 9ric^ siolscf lo Jbaeoq 
rfoju^' TO* Jbf[£ ,noiJobtcfo sri' Y^smei ot V^-CWJ^^^OQ^:© n^ avjBrf x^sa msxl^ 
-"'■-■ 8ftfjBnojt*o»(;f o eii d-£n'J ed-nsiti©i-£;JS ,eon£jjnid-noo £ iaf eeociifq 
od- ts*os(;cfo sd tauw doxieJbfvs ^labrcocsa drr^ xqC-^ hBuaoBo \L&iQm 
iOlOL .0^0 CX iS8X .XII K'£ ,sniO v saCooO .X^lad' 3xi;f saolsd 
a9lio#£5iOTis:tni oc^ efloi:;foe(;T!fo ni-sd-ieo ihjsrlct- QUii seujoo to si il 
-iatdt B-T! txid ^Xxii-^ srff no aiuein ^faiii li Xl^vsiq YJen* aaewen* Jbna 
nirfiiv XX£ YlIjsidTfi^fedwa af sa.so eiri* ni lo £ienl£Xqmoo lej-d-jsm 8ri:f I 
.XjsiTt arf.t sttolsd ©b^m ©d Oit anoitosi^do asiii/pai i£,di sXi/i srf* I 
l«rft ajj et«lsd fcTooei: srff litoa^ nol^tqmuesTq ©XdJenos^sT on si eisriT 
• ' ■" r)^«5sd svjsrf Jojit £>Xyoo d'.Bo'd' donsX-'ivs nk i^og Jbniaf sri:t lo gnirfitYn-fi 
naiti6oqstii«ii»iijK»4i srff ^o 3fiiifi;t~ei js y^ d'nsi'eqraoo 9JCj.:rt. y-^^-^^Jes 
ot ixoi:t-oir sritf no Jbjsd Jblerf need fcjerf eaawans ba^ anoiJesup e. 
'Jbssijpi enoi#8©Xfp'^ srTii- eetroaib ifoh XXiw d^olsisrid- sW .Basttqqx/a 
v'lS'' f '^Brf:f BTev/an.P Jbrcje' eeiaoJ^soiied-ni lo ^onsd-sqmoo sdi o* «£ sasif- 
fe-iic.i|,o2tiBoq©l) SffJ lo gniije* 9jij no bsei^i itaiil nssd 8v.=>rf biuodB 
•-.'-q i.4-i.-:--^ : ■•"■'■ •■■ -* ■ '- .iesTqqi/e o;t noiJora ©ri* no lo 

"'■©eXjsl ©Bxjm Jbea^sosf; tBxii 8£W bsd-qmsj** ©ensleb 'isri(}-onA 

-Ri ID 960 8rfc^ ni (fid^rf airf od- bj3 noitaoiXqqjE sixf ni adl^fnjsaiJBW 

ri;^j5$X ein' oJ- eouso srf :f^d* Ii»©jni>BXo ai J-i bnc ,eToi;piX gni^f^oixoJ 

Yi-fiioitsnsd srf;t ,wo£iv: S'ixf tjsri^ Bljssqq^ ifl .noii'BOixod'ni ^o ©BJjjecrii 

j-ojp q4rie cn^ifc srf.t rrstnw aisqe&i cooXjee tf'Baijss^ rroi;to£ si& ^dguoid 

bed'0.2T:t8dfi Y-t*ft3ioi't^x/e ton 'ai £>ioo©t ©riT .Ai£.Bb ain' gniax/^o no- 

^c^tnslet ©rft ©Xijrfw XinjB ,d"i tnsaaxq vXiijel oi- noi*B©jjp aidcf no 

©rid rf'i/o rf-aioq xIij^bLo i'oa ssoL d-i ,9x©ri nol^asop ©rid- 8©a.uoeiL 

08 tcoTQ srfd' J&*ri?5©i ©W .no eeiXet ©xf teAt bioost srft lo eJTJBq 

JbttttlnuexS ton ©Vijil ew *jBcft ©anslsb lo bnuo^g Tsrito srit no ijssXo 

.nOitsQjjj: --ixlt 
f)X©if JbeiijBm Jbnjj Xiiat 3:' " no iietello aisw WfiX lo enoitiaoooi? 



and rsfused by the oourt. We find nothin- ir. ^bs court's action 
in triat regard iniioating any visw of the law leas favorable to 
ths plaintiff than we have before espreassd. Finiing ac arror in 
the reoord ths judp-.ant is affir^rsd* 

Affirmed. 



c^ 



. actios^ a'^iuoo 9di nl ^lAiQd tr^n sW .*ix;oc ed* ^d t98.rleT £.i« 
fll TOTTe 00 s^-^itaiT .fisaestcqxe sno!tscf evBil aw rtBrit ni*ni«Xq eric? 

■,'■'. ' • ■:^.;'. . i JO i I J" 

.-•'..■', ■ - ■ ^ ■. ' r .^ ■ • .■ .... J' ..■-■£!. :. 9«~yc 

■■:;." ■ ^■■■1 ..'.J.. - .:■■ '^ , I 'I i-r:v.. -i. Y^"" "■ 

: :. : '■■::■:'.'.:■ ^:: o: :.,^^-. ; • l :^ ^ Jo t^iM:-.. , ii:J' 



.■Mi:- ■•■;■,:.: '■■^■■■- .' ■:':'■ , :^ij >-. : , •.••* ^ii;'.v ijic j -• j vtivf- 






cr.l r . if 



» > *■ ■. ' 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) _ 

SECOND DISTRICT. \ ^^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Cle7-k of the Appellate Court. 



^: 



'/. '■•'; ''•' -A-f ■?'<'.> -Yi'^rid .' : ;jiiiHH< 



. i-irfio Y':' "' b'i 



'4 



/ f (r 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presiding" Justice. 



Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice./ 
Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Just ice /t'' H. 



CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 



T 



^ 



V iAA^ (%:hl>'''^'% / f L 




\ y 




/^ 



8 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to~wi t : 






- \ 



no :Jiw-c.t ,r!f: 









Gen. No. 6199. 

Dan. J. Cur ran, — eV»«i appelle=,a. 

-. V3 Appsal from Knox* 

OJL» H. Junk, appellant 

Carn23. J, 

(A-^- < . V n i f f. P'.^ . ..J . Q- r rtafi ^n A . Alioo u -'^terrgEn , x avy y 2 r o , 

r3al sstate croVsra, ic-i:-- bu;.incs3 as Cui,- .>.u i;--Cui:j ::^n, .;,.b ";;.-:,j,cirib 



Illinois, *«■% X1U6 :jd an d 1 T 3 . ...,:sa■■y--^---•;.^»H^^a<*fe4^^^^^ 1 1 v ry^t T rxT ri' '^1 

-Tsliangs ^ his ^^rm of 1^80 acres in Minnesota rcr a j.iv:ry 'cble 
property in jttum.va, Icvva, o-; onging to Bosserman ■.' -ctherB^ 0->^- 
th^--Tif:l-:'.l,"'^t ■' .-i i^AC.^e .;j1 . rLi . .;vi~ienG-3, -u-i 0QU"t, cy ;.jvrs3Tent"- 
.•o#---eoiuas.»jL»_-iii^tx-uot-sd the Jury -tr •t'nsy' ,!oun-a--f--cr- the-pi--iir;:. i ■ : 9 • 

The declaration oonaisted 0: '^hs cofrimon counts .^ith an ad- 
i .- 
ditional count in the form of a oc.T.r.on count aiisging services 

rendered in exchange or real sstate ani personal property. The 

gensral i sue -vas plead -vith special pleas alleging that pending 

the negotiations in he real sitat© dsal in question there -.vaa 

an agreement entered into betwsen the pi intiffs ana :'efeniant 

that the plaintiifa should e^t ot the exchange of the property 

in .:.ueition, vriJ .:*hould further, ..ithin 'hirty days, procure an 

exchange of -^he Ot-^umwa property ."or farm lands in Fock Island 

County, Illinois; that the agreed comfsnsaticn to piairitiffs 

for the «7hole matter waa C-SSOOtOC due .vr.en tt^e -vhola transaction 

, was completed and not before, and that plaintiffs had failed to 
I 
procure the exchange for Reck Island County farm lands.. It ap- 

psared in evidence t hat .vare ^e 1 1 an -t , who had nev'-r met ' a'opojl e bb, 

wrote them on November IC, 1313, that he had ':wo sections of 

! land in Moore County, Minnesota, that hs would like to exchange 

1 
■' for icas other property, and in he correspondence ixraediately fol- I 



txoal moil IjsaqqA ev 

• " • . * . .0 .esnxeO 



-yrf^ -^tt*-^7r^TTr'■T»T'^>-^^ft^^-^^*^^^■l■^^ — " ' a*"" ^^ ■♦Tf * ^^> - : - -,jtfl«^Er-r»S-.I, 

-z*. nxi xftl^'- ed-nuoo nornmoo srf'f :o £»©Jei:Enoo noiJisiJ^Xosi; axJT 

aeciviae gnigs iX^; :fru;oo no.Timoo £ lo mio'i arf-t ni tnssoz; X^iici.: . 

©riT .^;tisqoTC: X^noeieq tnx;- sd'i'd'ss X^si lo Bsoerioxe ni Jbaietnc: 

3n2£jn8q i-nAi ■^cit'^siifi ejeaXq X^xosqe rid'xw^fiJBeXq bjsw ex/a-x XjBisnss 

eoBw aisrijf nold'esi/p ni Xjssi) eitd^^HS X£si sr: ni snoi^^ljogsn erl" 

tf-n^I- nal®*:' JP^js aUXJ-ni Iq ©rf.t aeswd-scf oifni b&XQiaQ tnemesTSB fLr 

YJ-isqoi<3 ari:^ lo -ftsn^rioxs sild" *o.-l'?& JbXuorie elll^Jni^Iq sxid- j-zm"! 

a£ eijJOOTr; ,»Y-st •^*airf' niri^fjtv' .Tsrij-^i/'t Mi/orfe Liis ,noi*esup nl 

Jbnislel iooH at &hasil obtjsI lol ^^laqoiq «wau;:t;tO silt 'lo sgnjBrfoxs 

allitnl/ilq oi noid-^ensomoo £)©sig£ sift is-iii ;eloniXII j^d-ni/oO j| 

noi*oi-enj5ii' sXorfv erf:*- aa.'iw sub 00»002t| «jbt? tisfisim. aiodw s;' --' 

o;t JbeXix* Jb^xf BlllinisLq t^di; La£ ,&iol9cf toa bas fcaJsIqaiOw c. . 

-q* tl .»i£in£X inafi'3: x^ciuoD JbnaXel atoofl :iol sgnBrioxs sn'j- sujooaq 

it aia X Loqr:;/!^ J-gji asVsn £i£ri oxiw ,-^wfeXI«q^^8v.Jt£rL+ soastlvs ni JoeT££c, 

lo enoi*066 owcf jbJJri sri iijrfi ,SX8X «0X ifcfmavoW no aiQdi etoi». 

9-^a^doxe otf' silX tXyow exl isdi ,«;foe3nri2M .ififniJoO aiooM ni baci 



lowin;^ this letter lie, na-iied a pric3 of #100, cc per acre on hia 
""^land, y.nd a yp61 - lo 6 8 4eiit him a description of the livtry s- ibis 
property in Ottuir/.a, leva, valued at ^75,0C0.CC to ^^lOC.CGCcCO 
tiiat was in the rrarkst iTor j^uch an exchange. Aftfr Turthsr 
corresponience apfsll sb n t^oonoluded to to to Icwa ■•nd ibv.'5;itii£;ate 
the matter, and appslleg * wrote hiir. on Dscsraber 1, ISlc^, eu^^.^ eating 
lEanr.er of masting and taking the journey, s.nl saying '.hey '.'ould 
look to him for coaimiiiione at ;j'5«CC p-r acre on his Minnesota 
land in case the ieal ■•■vas con3\imT:ated. Dan Curran testified that 



on Dsoemtier 5, he had a telephone cor/imunication vith a'. ;; o 1 lant ■ cXxJ-<^~^-J~~«^^ 
in .Thich . e, aopa^ ir^mlr, said the co^rniission terms v.ers aiti^iJ^actory , 
Junk -^enie^ «o saying, but Curran -^ oorrobor-v.ted in hia testimony 



v.'hen he r/as talkiner over the^j 



by his v.'ife who vr3 3 in the room v.hen he r/as talking over the'^^phon; 



and stat^ w'.iat he saiu in tlis conversation. Arrangements were made 
for meeting the O^wa parties, and Dan. Curran went to Ottumwa and 
met a' ' ':H ? ila ftt and tho^e parties at tl;e Baliingall Hotel *'usre 
December 6, ISliJ. Tiey looked cv:r "ne property ani carre home without 
effecting any bargain, but i.-nns diately thsreafter appell a nt <>^-y- 
'^rote ^ppellr^t^Q, t'.at he had bnen considering the iratter and a 
trade might be conaanmated if "you cut your coir.mission in two 
making it C>iC'CO«S Tv.'O or three :.:iya af tsr-.varda h o r ,;■ 1 1 3,ri t tele- 
phoned Dan. Curran to T.s't the leva parties at an hotel in Gales'- 
bugg, Illinois, and on December S tLey ail n-.st at t at plaoe. 
Aftir considerable negotiation an article of agree:rent was that day 
prepared anu signed, stating the proposed terms of ^he tt&K^xsttsn 
transfer and _;,ivinr each party a states, time to examine the other* a 
property and ;:._;.;rove tne contr-ct. December 11, a^^^ llan -fe- and 
Dan Curran ajain went to Ottumwa, Iowa, where there •:vere furthsr 
negotoationa. T.iey returned home, and on December 17 - a . j^~M\- ^ X i % /;U-j|t-<-^.^g a^ 
wrote >a4» pgll o o ft offering to approve the agreement if -ttijpyllatnj ^ 

■A 

would take as commissions ^1000.00 -.vhi-n the deal '.vas closed, 
^1000.00 when they disposed of the personal prop?rty?i and ^1000,00 



Bid no BTOii laq oo.OOI^ lo soliq js tsiKx;n .9fi xei^si airi* sniwoX 

ditjeglj-aevcfi £(,n.e ,£woI ot o-;^; oj- jbacul onoc^^e l i Mq %s sons'tcoqeeaioo 
;Bd-o« en«lM a Irf no stojS i':q 00,3| ' iij anolaelfflmoo toi. aid oi- 'AooL 



^sWfc, • tfnxjXX & gq . o - ri^iw noiJjBOimfmffibo snoriqsXsd- £ ij^S aff./ ■ «S" isaaisoeCI no 

. Yio:^OJBa.6iJf*a . eT:9w art(is*'.floiT8Eimmbo -ddi liAa {ti mil i q r ^^ \B-d' doidVi al 

Ynorald-e-'d- L-^d al bstj^iodoxioc.j^ astruO ^isd t^Anl^sm os j^einsl im/L 

.•-',.^JB JswmuJitO oit tnew itJBTioUO -.iiJBd'Jfeftii r«S:t'tt£q fiw*&*e5^^^ S^-t^asm -lol 

-disxfit X'itoH If£J5fl;iXX«a Sild" *«e seliikq H^odi £»nj8 lff!»fi«f§<g« tarn 

, , -. f.--^' -■• ■ 

■yorfd-i'-. ©mod s.Tijeo i5a,E ^t^'^SQiot'^ ^^"^ tsvo JbdiooX ^srJT «SXSX ,3 tscfmsosQ 



-eXs* JnjBXXs^qjB a£>iJEvri9d-^..e e^jot ssirfd- lo OwT 8*000E| tl snWsm 

-eeX^O nx ls:^od as. &£ esid"-ijeq jswoI an? tfssm o> naiiwO .nJsCI Jbsnorfq 

i,80.BXq &£>/:} c^Ji jf3jn XXis Y®-'^'* 5 letfrnecsa no finjs ^aiohlXX"! ,a3ucf 

ifjsij j-jBffd- ejb-v/ ^nemesiga lo 3io.trf"iJ2 nja noi*£l:?ose0 eXcf^asXiienoc 13jMA 

Ksi*Bx»ir*xJt »ri.+ lo emted- tsaoqoiq &d& -galis&B ,i5»nsXe has bsr^qBxq 

6*r^dio eriit talai&xe oi ckXj- tsJ^^e £ xtr^q dosi& ^filvlg Jbrije' ' iwlanfini' , 

bn£ >ft*ii-©4^ «XX TSdnrscsa' ,tc>citiiOO ddi svoiqqjs ]bn£ ^;tisqoiq 

iBdt'su^ - 6i©w eisril siarfw ^jbwoI. ,J&wMr:ti-0 d* itnsw ni^s^ rtJBixuO ajsQ 

''-*'^-*^ jaiiifaqra TX istfrnsosQ no fcn.c iemdri £)Sn*t0*9T: \:ar:T ..BnoJtif£o:fo89« 

'•a'grf- Tsq trfin 11 cfnemesig^ ©rid" evoiqqi"'bt'3nli9llo » o « XX -o c v€^ e:fonv 

.,,JbeeoXo ex'W Xjsofc ejcf.+ nsffvir 00,OOOX$ anoleaimmoo bj- ©i^J- tXwow 



•r^hen tliey shculi Jiapose cf the Ottuirv/a real •s3tatS4 Af/ - i3 ' 1 1 e q g— v x-gv-t^^ 

"^navrered this letter micisr ths acme date, .iiscutising tae past 

tran--action ut length, rcJerrin^ to t^is tsrma^as to oomrLiBsions 

first orooossd, and r-sxuoins to vxry triem. Appcxl - a «4: anawsrsd th2 

next day by latter, saying li^t the coa'misaion was too much ■xr.'i.llZcJXi 

h3 would net ^-^0 on ".ith the transaction. A day or two thereafter 

■a cfO ell i£.ag wrote hiir- enolcsing a letter froffi an Icwa ^arty -^vho 

7?a3 talkinfi- about "buyinc: the iDowg, property, ani shortly after 

warda Can Curran met a9pyil:::^nt - at an hotel in Galsaburg Illinois, 

and Curran sa^ they then again aiocuised the rr-atter of oor::- 

mission and ao ne 1. 1 ant . aaked if they -.culj charp-e a .Turth-^r 

coiTiUiission lor diaposiing of "rhe lo'.va propertyt Ks told hitr ^hey 

^vould, and that aypiil - lant said to -to ahead ^/ith it, he ■.■rQuld pay 

the commissions ail right. After.varda, January IS, 1914, the 

parties again^iist at Otturnwa Icwa, and jloaei the trade. Curran 

tsetif ie|L Junk hhere again, befor?. the trade vas closed, told him "^^-t. 

V 
he would pay tue commiasiona ii the deal went through. On their 

way home an ,o jfl l - a,n t pixid Curran '^.'z>ZO %Q>Q) to a ■oly on cc;r.rr.i3jionfe9 

■A:yr»t ;l: - l GOti were end^avcrin'; to uispobe of the Iowa procerty for 

App o llaKt ^and there -.vaa iO'xe correspondence about that. They 

wrote aoyei r lant . letters on February 7, March 4, Y.arch 34, and 
-1 

April 11 deranding further payjrent on coar.missions , -.vhich rriet no 

response and rio claim that no coTirdssion -^s.e due, though Junk 

did write them on v-.j-oh 38 urging t":em to do scirethinj about the 

sale cf the Iowa prof«rty» . ^, 

There *»^no claim that -art' . pg 1 l - e o- a did not work fairly and 

faithfully for a?:?g].iant , or that there .vas any fraud or vrong 

or loss in the transaction, but a^p b .larH: testi Tied denying any 

agreement to pay the original oornnisaion charged, ?,nd saying that 

at the time the trade ^ras consummated there was an agreement be- _ 

t-.een him and Dan Curran at the hotel in Ottumwa that a .-.. ^J0llJ .' aj '' — 

,A " ' . 

should trade him in and trade him out of the property for ^3500.00 / 



v-^ 



'■^BBzr srfxt gaissi/oalJb .^&&£.b souse srid- t s bJcu;V%9 ;>• if sl'^e I'll i^ bei8wen£ 



•''^imov-iotettem&dt Jfcsasjjosii) nijssx narfit TjsrfJ Jw^iia as^uO bn's . 
" '^fi<5 '"^"tiluQw" *if ,?i'itldiw l)£9rLis og: o* Jbl'ae" i ^fi*?IX e qe ^s t^dt'tH^^' ,tXyo,v 



"^ 9B:l~\MtX"\6r'^:ti8xfnfiti, ^afcTje^iried-lA .^dgia Xl£ snoiaB^ioimoc srf* 

5^^' -.lot ^tesoXo es^ etsti erf* siolscf. tfl-i-egjB s%extt* alxu/Ly^ei^lrffaed 

>-'.'^U- .-.ji-iijis- 
^snoleetffmroc no YXq^Ja ot 00»002| njsii^O Jbxxsq t t t JSii'io^CM eaiod X-^w 

^ ■ _'^- - -q:- 

rot '^tlsqorrq £w<3l ©rid- lo saoqaii> o*:, gaitoVva&ine aisw <. .-^ 

• imjc -.^S rforriiM ,'* xfoxBM ,V, ^tcjeyrtcfel no s a ff d d- s X' ^ ct&l - i e * ajs sd-oi.- 

"On 'd-ein rfoiffw » aitoXfeelramoo no itaemYJeq isrfd-Tjjl gnij&njsa^sjb- I^X .XXaqA 

3ffrjjL rfguorf:^ ^Bub b.sv noxsaiitfmoc on Jjerid- ralf^Xo on Jbns^ eanoqe:^;' 

. erld- &uod8 snirfd-smoa at o& stBt'J •^at'siss 8S rfoiJSM 49 atdrid- sd-lTvr Jbl'. 

j!:^-^*RK»?«#yjf. *::■» -^ »T^- • »,4^ '*. ♦Y^iscioici JBwoI 9dt lo sXr 

' ' ■ I^n« Y-C^'i'fi- afiov tort X)ifc . •e9*-Jrffqr5*. ^fjcrfd «ii.e:Xo ocl-w* sidxiT 

grtoiv to Jbujstl: •^xus ajrw eTsrft ijSrfd- lo ,*aj»J^ii<»iS lol: ^XXu^trfitij- . 

Tjna snlYitsi fcsl'^i-td-aed- ■jH^ j s I j a qq i ; d-xrcf eHOid'OfiBn^Td' an'd^ ni ssoX i- 

rf'^rfd 'SaJt'tifs b"n£ ,Jb»s"X«Di'lo noieaimicoo L^atgtro 9dt "^eq.ot ici^m^si-g^ 

-ecf Jnema^TraJB 'rri fijBW a^arf* fisd-jBrnnri/enoo exiw ©JbjsT^ 9di amXit arid itjs 

,vv:.\..., ■-..-■'-A: ' 

"-^ cs g Xi o cmra - txrid- jswim/d-tC ai Xstori.erft *xj n£iii/0 njEja ba£ mid neawt 






and that nottilnty should be paid until ths '.vhole tran-oction Tras 
complste. Hi3 testimony diff erd-'^f rom his plea in not Confining 
the trading out to trade :i"or Reck Island Courty lania*^ 

1 Thia l^t a sharply contested cusetion of fact for -^h^ jury 

\ 
to determine. \iYe conclude, xrom a reading oi the evidenoe in the 

I record, that t\e jury .vere not only juetified in fiadlnp: that 

Currania originalX proposition of ^5.00 an acre as coTTiiiaDion 

was accepted by arAellant, but 'hey couli ret reasonably reach 

a differsnt concluai'&n. The -rusation still r'rnains whether ^if- 

; f erent terms -^vere agreed u -on as testified by aroellant at the 
hotel in leva on the da^ ths contract was completed. The tes- 
timony of acpellant is ver"Y clear taat there waa, -^.nd of Dan Turran 
equally clear that there Trae\not. The f3.ct that appellant irrr.:6© 
diately after':hat meetin?; paidXCurran ^500,00 to arrly on corrr'.i- 
saions certainly Joes not suppd.rt his theory that no corKiasiona 
were to be paid intil the lov^a pr{;jperty aa .iiaposed of, 'vnd his 

^failure to answer eubsequant Isttetvs frorr. a'-^pelleea de^-^-nding 

i further puyrrent on comri.iijsions by cltiming t';at no ccTmissions 
were due, sae.-ris inoonr.iatsnt vith t.h\ claim ha is now .-naking. 

'We are entirely , satisfied vath ^h^ V3r''4ict of the jury on that 
queation, ^her3forr the ;judgrrent should ^taisd unless ths record 
diaolosea itiaterial error of lawo ^ 

\_JErrcr ^ a=.aigned o e;iving, refu:in;-^ and modifying instruc- 
tione .i: Pliintif f 6* sewond :;iven ins'-ruction inforrr.ed the jury that 
ths burden of proof xae u:;on the plaintiffs to show a contract 
lOt ooftmisaions an3 that ths contract, if so shovm, stands until 

a reel SI on or change is snown, and that f^sburien of proof is upon 

. - ^~ s 

aeiendant to show a recision or change. ^ a oo no . 5 n'hs t "* f»44-&l.^ 

ob j option to thi s- i-n 3tr u o4-i^fty-"l»vit^"-i-f'-4J»»g»-4A an y u ncii r taJL&tyL.. 

..:xauJL^i_iJuJ„a_E,.««;^d4^4-^»y--.^-i*^-j^^^ .third sri'/en instruction 

^£\ hirh the jury "jure t » >L d if they belisvsd from a preponderance 






Snlni'lnoa *on ni jssXq aid aio.T:l BislllJb ^ctomltft^t eiK .sJ-sXqiBOo 
•j,^.. , , \__^ aLrtfiX Y^'^J^o!^ fcnjsXal ipqH ^oli, db^it o&^uo anXijxad- arlit 
. Tjaut \iii lol ifotel lo noi:;fasi;p Jbe^as^-noo • ijXqiJsxJB « ^IfeX eiia'T i 

Qdj aJ: et^naJblv© Qri;t lo sflXtaaa uSjao^l ♦^JbyXonoo sW •enim'isjf.sJo 4)* 

-a,sd- a4T .l>s*«Xqmo!>. axw ^sfiid-no^o .3xi*.vWJ|t:? «Mi*; xjo £woI ai Xa^od 

rfjBaTu3:;n^ lo JbajR -^^tsw 5ta4ij}-«rf.*-;.xa9Xo .v^au-aX- ^njaXXaqq^ "i^ y^aomii 

, . . ©e-a^ni *^^XXsq'^^6 . tBrft cf o^slfe JxfT ,. ioiiTakaw a^flt^iJ d-JsrU -xsaXo vll^pe 

-iitrmoo ao ifXqq* ,04. -QO.QOal aa^^au.Q/i)ifiq saX**3'TR *£X[:t:):©*lJS YXe^Jsifc 

enoiaaiflffroo on i&6.i-xto^Ai- bM *;x6qqua ,*.oa .a$.al^., .T(Xfli£;tTao aaoiae 

aid JbiijR-t^o taaoqeiXi ,ea.v .'\[d'i9qci'xq,«woI ari;t XX^AJft >t 1 oi s%evr 

SnXJbnj3a.et essXXaqq^ moi^ ayi9id;8X ifn9x;pa,fctt;e j j-rwXXjQi 

axTOleeifitmoo on i&i'.i gnimla'Xo y<^ e«oiaaimmQ©--ao ij:usiii^^q lexlJfiui 

-.gniixsffi wort el sxl mX*i.o iril d*iw Jas^aX^nooiU^ smeea . .,ajut . ja^s^' 

rf'jsdt fiQ YiJ^'t Sii:' 'to d-olji^'iev sot siii« Jbsil&XJ^ee ,Y-CaTxJn9 -ajjg ai;^ 

„ . *v. . '^ i -r ■ ^- f' -*■ •WjbX 'io :roi"te Xj»XxsJ-jBfn asaoXcair. 

-ouij-enX gniY^iJbom i^nje snisx/lai ^gxtivi^ .0 ,i)angi^aA «t y nS j 

. i&Ai v:ii;i: 9fit bainTo'irti nold-ouT-'enX navis X>iio'»sa *alli,*al£X<j||[. aaol:' 

(J-o^iitfloc £ worife, od 8!t'jj:dTix^Xq ©xl;f noqir a*si' lo.o<iq lo nai-iucf -arf-t 

Xid-njj eJbnjctB tOworiE oe \i ^ojead-aoiii -sdcf - ^..; a^iaaimmoo -ro^ 

XToqjur el Irooaq \o rtaf-xi/cferiJ^ t^it £,a£ t^wpxia. ^aX Si^nje^riQ iq nol^aioaa £ 

■i -^ ~ • 

r 8 ^ -^f fi'-ff^ rfn— -17 n f f n -nff- . a:g/tBrio 10 noiaioe? x: woxia oJ JAJSinalsx 

jt±aij»*»a*«w- j££ugg-aX- - a«a-fW-"5tX" #«€l~-,«oX^^o«'rf<hefrt---«-if{4--»4— fidX4-«*^-tf c 



jMUig-ax - a«a-f 



noiJojJi^aal nevls JbiXxf* a^itixiXAX^ j ■•fe^-XX>»jna.a-Jt^^4-iL-AX Ifi O cT j: 

- .noQSiq -6 ittQi,'i ^svalXad' y-s^* 'j-i -j iw^'ft ^ aTo.w \'^^\t •ri^ ffaLnbVr^ f- 



of all ths cvidsnoe thi facte (reciting them) claivrisd toy the . 

plaintiffs, than, ubleoo they further hclisved rrom a prsponiar- 

anc3 of all the rvidsnce thnt the contract v/ith rcfsr-^ncs to 

CQmmissi'ona waa rescinded or changed by th2 jonsent of both ths 

parties thereto, they ahould find for 'he plaintiffa. By the 

next instruction thsy wers told, in substance, i -? the original 

contract relied on '.vae proved by a prsponierance of Ir.he evii3nc>^ 

properties 
and 'rhe psaxiiattsa were ifterwarda exch-nsed by th3 defendants 

through the plaintiff-. aa re.l eat?.te brokers linisr the terms 
of the agreeiEsnt entered into ith r:f5rence ':o oO'Viir.iasions, then 
the pliintiffs are entitled to rscovsr "unlefs you balisve roni 
a preponderance of- allthe evidence in tr.e case that the ^aid 
contract v/aa afterwarda icutually rescinded or changed." 

By defendant's "irat jiven instruction the jury were told 
that if they believed the partisa had a contract :or ocmmisaions 
still, aa matter of law, there //-.a nothing to prevent tbsm rrom 
making a new a;;i different con-ract at a different time, and if 
they beli-sved from a preponderance of '.he evidence that they did 
make a nevf or another or dif f srsntccntract in rsepsct to co.iir.is- 
sione, then the ne.v contract v.ould take the place of the firat or 
original contract. Thi s in 8 truo ^yreeh- v o jy--f a ijl y ;:i' t;9e- n ' b oub~-y&-' 
tlnr— j- ury th e-^^a-t^-o-a.ax>t<^~^iit^<»44xau A?t'"^-1^^>'*^, offered other in- 
struct iona -■-■lo.V-'K y^ir.min.-t-.jP-'S. nnt y "-.a ..:iJl^..~f:^mr•>^¥'^■•^^l^rrs^^ 

t hai^.th^.. .oo*ii^t--fead--.^a4;«4-'-*^'-t-4»-*="^wpy'-«?b^tt^ 
-«fw*|»tta^ stating in detail if they believed there ".as an aeree- 
menl between plaintiffs aiiu defendant to trade the Iowa property 
for farm lands in Reck Island County, Illinois, "or elae.rhere" 
and the undertaking \-.-x3 not per:"crmed by t:ie plaintiffs, then they 
could not recover. The court struck out the words "or elsev/here" 
and this action jb» d-.f ended by aTpello 8 u8 on the ground that it 
waa a departure from the pleadinrs to instruct the jury that 
there waa an agreement to exchange for lands else-.vhere than in / 



V'^ 



o* eonf^elsi ^liiw d-o.ei*noo s:I;t t^di &oa&hlv& .eM Sis lo sort* ; 

Sild- diod to *n,$onoo add- >id ijssnjQilo to JbsJbflloasi a^w aflo : aalmmpo j 

edi xSk »8l:14;frji«Iq eri.' xoi bail btLuoftB ^^misiry- note's 3d& ^Qlttcq 

i.-%nl-Qlia trf^ Aii , socle it actu.& stl .»JfaIai s-rait .:\{SfW:, flold-ox/i^en-t d-xea 

wonstivs sdi Jko ,MonBi^lao<i&zq, M \Ccf Lavoxc^ aja?;, ao bellsx d-o^ttd-noo 

Hlnjsfcaelali eri*'^- ijsgrc^riox© BJbXB^isa-ix; ^rxsv K»±*»ia:Bsxi5 0rf:t has 

aanrs.:? add ..'a;&iixut .axsioicf e^x-lsa jLji9ri_^6«;;ij ^tiid-ai^sXq -erf* risxjoirft 

fl8ff;t , anoxia a iftiffloo od ©onsaBltrT xtifxr; o&at b&%etrib i^nsmestsa. 6i;t "io 

. Jfljvt':; eveils.cf, J!ar,0:Y-.,eadXxuf" isvao.6i ocf tsX^ichBs ffr-jj? el Jt-l^fll^Iq erft 

5^?- 4t-M»s^£f<J'-^JBC{i- a^*©- aM fli ^nsLi.Vje. . ©if i)-XXJ3 - ■'ib eon>BaetnoqsTrq « 

AXo.^- .eiaw ^C5;iJ&. ?4*t mttOMZ^aixl a^ri^Jaxtl Bricu^ba^'^Bt' xQ 
exroiaaiaitnoo «o?^ JoJST^aoo jb t£d Mt'iisq^ sdt-bwviill^^- 'X&di 11 ..iAdi^ 
mosrl rasjriit JJiavsaq 0* gairicfon: «j5W aieri* ,w*iX lo lacf^jBfc «Ar.,IIi*e 
11 bas ,awid ^nsiallli} . js is tcsit-^aoc iaQxsl'ilh bnsvrta <a gnlaffim 
htA x^di tspt. . eonstive sdr lo sonje-icfcnoqsiq x fnonl fcevaiXacf Y®f-* 
-almrijoo oi toQqBsr at d'ojsid-nooi'naas^llls -4a u©d#-0*uj-wo wan-««:.di«il- 
70 ;feijfcl: ^di 'Ilo aoaXq arfj a^^d" JbXuo.v j-o«ainoc v!&ci 9di npdi- -t^aiHsfkr 

'V^...>.,..A..,,.:A.:5..-5;. 

-asig* njs ejsw Qxsdi JbevelXsd Y.^^^ "^-^ XiJslsi; at ■^titt-siij «^)*MnNsd^ 
Ylisqoiq «wpl 9r;.+ 9b£,if oJ- d"njafca©2:a*i--i'(ii; allX^nisXq .a^awd-eBcf irtem - 
"aKai^iifvroaXs 10" ««2o.filIiI .y^^i^^oO ijn^iXeX iooH al Bbasl stn&^ let 
YSff:^ cadd" ,e^iiini£lQ 9iio_xd JbainTo!tTs©q ^(Ws '|>^v§nl:fjs?»tefcfujr ani l)aB " 
"eierfwaeXe 10^ aJbiow ad:t *i/o al&yi^ta tinoo »dT .aevoos-x *ort fjXxroc 
a tsdi biuJQis Bd& no a a a JX - g^! - .stne i^i; «:(. rroit^-oj? ein.-* £.~. 

tJ3Jci;t Y'tt^t ®^'* i^oif'i^eni od- a-anXiiJSiaXq arfj moil aii/^ueqeL £ a.-. 



; Rock Island County.\ 17^ - o not -t-YtiLntr~Vt)XSr''~^KattvrTr-^'^''-i^ 

I d t ^>.r'=^nt ^ . zreenisnt .ve pre3Vim £^-44---~^ffaia«Fa»-i^^-girb-i-g-r-- un -t ls r — ^^.-fsr 
I g^en ^. r al i u a ua ;_ _^^^^^_££^ '^ s. t r b— 4-%-^7T3y , t>i2 jury had been 3ev--ral 
I times clearly ani definitely told that if there was a later and 

-| different agreement xs^e the plaintiffs could not recover, and 
I it v/aa antirsly xinr-eoeseJ^y tc/';zive thsae instructions, and con- 
sec^uently not rov^raibls sr)x;6r tc so mcJify "ihera. The court 

j reiueed other ins trn-ct ions of«red by ths iefsndant which //e 

I ■ \ 

I havci examined and re-^ard prooerly^ refused. There were no 
, I " ■ \ 

^ difficul^r questions of law involved.^ ^.nd insofar as it w:^.s nsc- 
i 
' eseary to advise ^he jury about the lavirxgovsrning the subject, the 

, instructions giVen fully served ^.he pur .cseix 

The riiction for a na.v trial viras accomranied by an affidavit 
•etting up newly iiacovered evidence, but n9t the --ffidavit of 
the witnesfl v/hose svidsncs had b^en discovered. A motion '"or a 
ne w trial founded on nevvl-y discovered tsstirr.ony should be sup- 
ported by ':hc axxidavits o^ Lhe ivitneisea by whoni it ia .-roposed 

{ to prove the faote relied upon, or acre excuse should b? showxn 

' for not obtaining- them, J:.neway v Burton, £C1 111. 73. But iside 
frooi this there waa nothing of i.iiportance in '-ha ne'.vly discovered 
evi_conce . 

There is no question about 'he amount of the verdict* 

I Aa we have before said, the jury, by agreement of counsel, ,v=re 
instructed if they found for 'he plaintiffs to render a vgriict 
for that amountDB, therefore, if ".hey found anything was due from 
the defendant to tiie plaintiffs they had no choice but to adopt 
those figures, -.nd neither party could complain. The judgment 
is affirmed* 

Aff irmed« 



brrjs Ts^fil £ Sirv 3i9rf.t li *je)i* tIo:t Y-^e^inils^b has \ltEt>lo Bemtf\ 
fcftj! ,Tsvo09T ton filuoc filliitnt^iq scft -©fc^ism *neffisei3s Jn&ic&l'iifc i" 

/ 

'" '*" on sisw sisriT .Jbsau1:sTy«fXi9q»-i<I Ijhtegsi Jo.iiB i)8rtlnr£xs cvAii 
-osrt 8J2W *! e£ tsloant tas ^svlovni WjeI lo' aaoltesup tXi/oilliJb 

^- - >• 

tlV£jbii^B aje v'<^ ijexnj^^moooiJ erw l£iiJ wan £ toi noltoir. ©ifT 
" 16 tlVJBJbil'ip erf* tqn tad .eonsjivs Jbeisvoofilfc ^-^^9" <?^ Srilt^ea 

"-'jBTol croitom A .berevooetb nsecf Jbisri eonstlvs saorfi? asartiiTi ed;?' 

-qx/8 9cr £l0orf8 x^osi&eei bsisvoosii v'-twsn no Jbeisni/ol l£tzt n ©n 
*'Jbeeoqoic el tl modvr yd asasecrtiv ©rf;t ^io eJlvjKimjj ©if? t* ia*ioq 

rrttiirorfa" scf Jblx/orfe ©eooxs smoe to «noqy Jbsilstr s;^oi;l sr'J- ©voiq o* 
'6Lla£ ;ti;9 .£'9 .Xll LOa ,nod"TuS v ^jsrreffiL .fcari* -sntntstdc ioa lol 

£9T9Voc = lfc Y-Cwsi^ si-* nl ©OfrxsJ-roqKl lo gnirftDn bjsw ©isxlit 6iff:^ eot- 

"*'^'' " .*oltt9V srf? lo ^niro.TJB sdf ti/odjs flot*a©ifp ofi ax eisrlT 

"^•^aw ilsanjjoo 'io tnsmeoi^x \;cf ♦YT^^'^C ®^* ,ibii^B siolac dvrrl sw aA 

ifolbT©v js lettisi 0* a^litnijBlq arf-^ toi fcauol xsdi li ije^oj/itani 

•'moTi ou£ «£w gn2rf;tYfr£ iini/ol ^srl"! 'ii ,aiolsi©n? iKitnxfom* JjBfl^t ao^ 

tqoJb* ot fu6 ©oiorfo on Jbjsxf ^sriif elliifntjelq ari-l-o^f ^n^insleJb di£* 

tJtem^iiX/ {; enT .ni^.J:q.-noc AIuoo ^^''^^Q: tsffd ian Jbn.* ,eeTi/2i^ ©Eorf;? 

.ieaiiiUjB al 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. i' ^^' I. CHRISTOPHER O. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing- is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said x\ppellate Court, at Ottawa, this - 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



•»* 



;/. -Mil lf^ AiiB\:.) .-ni'jQ. .') n; 



\ J / I 

/ (/ 

AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, * 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presiding Justice, 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice. / 

I 

Hon, JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justice. / 
' CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. ^ {j (j 1<,A« /^ /W 4 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. / 



\ 
\ 






\ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



■- . . has. bstbc.vci ^m -. 

. -3 i t a Lf C ( ci U/m li J. v. . M V\.W.! ' 



'A'^-iv-gi'X baz B&Tov? erf J at 



Gsn. Ho. G30E. 

City cf Peox-ia, appellee 

V3 A;'C£al from Peoria. 

Western Union Telegraph Co. 

appellant « 
Cams 3, J. 

This is :in action by a:-:pell3e against the Wsst vrn Unicn 
Telegraph Cc:r:c,ny, of the same kind -^^d- oharactsr aa it£- suit 
against the Postal Teisgraph-Cable Comcany, in -hich '.7S fils 
an opinion h^jrewith. (Gsn. I\0. 3207) The game counsel present 
the cass hsrs, and:^ practicaJ.ly the -lafr-S questions are raised and 
argued. For ths reasons stated in the opinion in that oaas the 
judgnisnt is affirasd. 

Af X ir.T.ed. 
Niehaua J. took no ?art» 



.oO iiu^issisT noinU m. r/ar.'; 

slXi SV' rfoin- at .^'lUDomcO ©Xcf^O-ilq^iasrsT I«-:feo<3: ©ri? JenJt^g^ 

Jnese.TO leaax/oc ©m^B srlT (T0S8 «o!f .frsO) .rfrf-iwsi?if nolniqo nje 

AjfiX: t3sl£T S1.S snoid'sswp Q!us? edi xLLsol.io&rq ha£ «ei5ri sero 9£f:f 

• rf'xeq pn afoo* .L ai/isn'exT' 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, | ^, 

SECOND DISTRICT. \ ^^' I. CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this _ 

da}' of in the j'ear of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clei'k of the Appellate Court. 



:/-, MfiJ 'li. jl'iofj .y-i'iVjC .' > n: 



.soUU) vui lii b'lOS'i 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, ' I 

I "■-- ..,,..:..:- 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, .fhe fifth day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , 'Justice. 
Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justice. 
; CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk^sO ^ O x^n 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 



244 



\ 5 






BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

;■; the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



, c .: e i !t r 1 ha.B b e 1 5 auci an.-. 

. 3 r T ?,i;l. -^r; i b / b si'^ , -.,... -lOWASH'. 

. tro i ;!■ 3 III- , 8 S 'AEA^j , I 3PIAU u 



^.' 1 



,?:«.; V-r N ■: >| 






no :.Jxw-oi ,b^~.p 
?.eiv%i"i tan gb-fow sil.i n.f ,i-r. 



Gen. No. 610S. 

John H. Gib=ion, apcellse 



V3 



FraaJc L. Pitr.sy,' -xop 
Nishaus, J. 



Appeal from City Court St^rlir.j 
.ant. 




irr '^ijiTi - cy , entsrei into 



Ift— tr-is :;ase, TTfc 
a written contract with .sssema^z^ --J-Qiiu R K , Git/afc i u en ths 25th, 
of June 1913, by 'vhioh -^hs -^^^-i^^^i-Laxit afrrsid tc convey tc ths 
ar .-^ - i -lJ^ -3 , by '-arranty dssd, a f-ir::!, 'vith a d-v2llin~ house thsraon, 
in ths 30Ui\ty of Tait^ii^ids , in aoniiieration of th3 j^ay.r.'^nt 
by 4^e^ii«5'of |13,000 aa fcllo\v9; 4300 oa3h in hand; tHOO 
in a note rnade by J. W. MoCrsady, to be andoreed cvsr to appellaiv ti 



and the bslanos of ':h3 consideration to be sattlsd by 'a-^-^'-s^ro^^ , 
at --he tiir.s of tb^ ielivery of the deed tc him, on March Ist* 
1914, by making a further paynsnt of .';3700 and ': y '?i . inj: ancthsr 
mcrtgagQ on the prsiiiiasd, for f4975, -vith intsraat at z/io osr annum , 



dalivsr to l ap p oli c e s warranty ..icsd, and :-^ive hir? pcsosseion of 

the preniiees on L^arch lat. lSl4j the prsmiaea to ':e as gocd 

condition as t'ley -.vers at -.hs date of the contract, ordinary 

wear and tear sxoepted. 

At about tha date fixed by the .contract for the delivery 

of the deed and -the posassjion, -a ^^elt^ --ent to 'sn^^^^^ant-, vvho 

waD oaahier of the First National Bank, at S!:2rling Idlinoic, and 

derr.and3d of , ay-v.' i 1 1 g n-t , that he carry out the terirs of th'. contract, 

by d3liV2ring to him the deed and the possession of the prcrnisea; 

and offsrjd tc perform his part of -'rhe contract, by cayinr the 

$3700 which ho had oravvn from the Stsriing National Bank, and had 

inl-iia poaaesdion for that ourcss; and by d3liv,*ring to a^ ■. Alli Ju't l , 

1 
the- notes and i.ortra^a for the S3ttlsaisnt of 1.4975, .s recjuired 

by tie terma of Ine con!:ract. Th= evidence aho^s that a-op'ollant - 

"\ 



.80X6 ,oVl .n&C 
.salXsqqjB «not.oiO .K ciiiol 
.:?;i2Ii£^5 JtjJoO \'c!-iO mo*:'! l£eqcA ev 

. ^ -^^ .!# ,81/EiielTI 

OGXI!:. it-a£.rf al.dEJ^o 00£* iBwcXXpl ex:. 000.8X|. lo'^^X^ 

iscJoaiB -nX-i:r Y :' ^"^ OO'^^t ^c cfns^^^i^q aeci^fiul 5 s^isf^m ^d ,^X8I 
.aiuan^ :csa> *^ tac-te^ni rf^lw ,5^6^^^ ao't .eeei«8iq sn^ no eg^s^^om 

. ^0 noia8 2£eoq mi/svi- tn^ ,JbeeL Y*a£i:c£v.' e^kiSg^^oc^ levlM 
^003 a* e: o* eeBimsaq erL^ iM5X .;fsX rica^lJ no esai.i.3^Q sift 

♦ ts^qsoxe !£©* tciB tjbsw 

,#o^.^aoo .rit 10 e.'HTSCf sift iuo Y^i^c od *^rl:^ .te:£^iq=i^,,.^o iei^n^mat 

' ie..imo-xq 3rf^ ^0 noisBae.cq scIcT to fca^i: sit mXxf o.^ snlatviXsfc X^ 

erfo^ .aLx.:i Yd ,*o^.tnoc arl: ^-o (T.^q airi ..ol«q o* ^o.^no m^ 

Dr.ri bax .^n^3 X.r.noI*xIl 3niX.3t3 ^cli moil" mv^ttb i,^d sH rfcXilw OOVCft 

,^;:;i^i^o* 3ni:reviXei .d i^ns i«eo..x;Q t^ri.^ lo^ noiassasoq sX.-l(tl 

iSTt^psT 8.- .2Vei>$ ^0 *n8r.sXttee srft loi es^.s*ao;e fcnr 39cfori srii 



was ready to islivsr ths warranty deed, but practically ai:r.itted 



tliat l"ie could not carry out nis i-rrserr^jnt In x'e?:-:rd to oiving 
-gc33:*^^S; pcoi:.e33ionj and it ar, /^'jiars ironi hi? q-'t^ t :-:3ti.rony, tliat 
he proposed to obtain for a .n ft^-r-Mff^ soins: cflier dwelling house 
to occupy, until h>2 couxd put aim in poa-iisiion oJ" the dwe-i-ling 
housa on the prsmisaa in qusaticn; .Inich oZ far 3f<^:^^€riie'3 rjfua3d to 
accept J and thereuoon tt\e->ai|a2:s:£ia« declared tic con-Lract at :i,n 
end, and de.r.anded a return of /chc part of tl: consideration . 
which had oscn paid to ■ aTtv^'iirrls ^^ ; ■: ;. - > a :; 1 - hn !|^ refu^aa, •:^.nl .: j.-t r; : >\ .± - ^ Q~f-^^-^'<'^^-^ 
ccairr.snood this suit tc roco'.":: 



'.u:!; paid. 



|;1334 . 63 ,\^^luah----ff^aii---H!^-'3TTOTnTtr-^^^ 

\ -'^ r^ ' — — -"^ '^, 

a a j.;:pc^a •.v J| ^- .' t 4;;jSJL; an;.Ut (i^^^urssd cy the b.^'r-e^rimrt— jL^^e,-^-^^-^' 

that u/idar t::3 :;:.Qts presented in evidence, d^pp jllce had no ii£;j:?.t 

to recover; and that ths avidence l;J.ii^c irdiow, +'iat .'.ypfc ie^d^^^'-^'-^^^^f^ 

tendered psrfcr.r.anoo on hit; part, gr a v.n.iiinjrpeeg a^d ability tc 

perform; cr that tha actual pert" crrcancs ci this contract, which,- 

was irutual in its character, '"/as crevsnted by ihe ui-... Lllaiit« ( 

-1 ' ,\ " ' 

ya 'think ths cviaencc ci early \f;hows, that acpellss cffsi'^d 

to oer3orra his cart ox the ccntra^ot\ in ^^'cod faith, and tha-t h^ 

haa, at\ xhs tins, the ability io parfcrm it; that hs had ths\ 

^3700 in ^:oney ready for rinal' payment; and the notes and rr,or-tt- 

;ag5 for t^e balance of the purchase Jirice, in accordance with 



[the t;:rTK9 oj 
carry out th^ 



I 

\ ] 

:i2 contract. A. ^psllsTitl admitted hii inability toi 

provisions cl hi^ .:jontrapt, T'coairing ai:ri tc '".u:'n 



over th^ poseassion of ■the -prsmises on W^iroh lat. 1S14, by propcs^ng 



to piocurs f crVa^fTsllee another dwsllin:_5\;)la<le. Thers y^^^-^asfefflS-— 
evid.nce tsndinn, to show, that th.3 prsmisoa v/ere net in as .rood 
con:.ition at ths time of ths making of the contract; rhat ths 



dwelling house ^aa quarantined, o.vin^, to 



rraa&nos Oj 



iniali- 



-Qatii.9xw sdi '10 fioiasseeoq rji miri d-jjq LIjuoo &ri Xx:fni/ tlfqucs^j oi- 

K 

J . , - , 

coii-JBisJt'ienoo ?ri? to ^t^q sxfrt to ntti/S'?! ^ h&bru^T.eb biai:' ,fcas 






c- 



, , r *«ssii*-$y5«?« Oj £iliq adf^d'bsH rioirlw 



.fiix-jq ratra 3r::t ii-vobdioJ it life :.ns.T.nroo 

■^~ ' .'■ - ' ■---.-,., 

ot ^ctXIM,s finjs ea9rr3aXXiiw x: "icQ ,tifiq aid ao oor. q tsieXino^ 

jj>si«l!ro saLl^q'-i^ is.'i'^ ,awoia/ \fXa«S9lo sonsJsiVa 9-'i:f aJnidt^S/l 

M ^rio- bxi.-; ,rid-x.6i 5005 ni 'itOiBi^noo sit lo ^afi'q aid mio^asq Oif 
/ '' / \ • . . ' J 

[■9d& b)iti. 9Tf *j3ri;t j^l ftriotiteq o^ ^*iX2cf^ 9il:f ,8inii 9iTJyj>B ,a£ii 



p^ T[i IL ideal ■ ttii Jbet.ti.'niJfi /d^xfcXlsq' A ; toj^Tdaoo sr.i 

Sn^eoqo'iq ^(^!i »^Xi?X .'>^eX rfoi*->'\I no aaaXMetq 'dxfi^- lo uoiBsySsdoq riTtf levc 
■•■•■* — osBte£*^?i»^ eT©£lT j.ebjt;rf| iB^-t-'^'^s''''^ i9xf>on,e 'eeXX#^^?«-Aji si^ 

bdcQ Ofi nl ton stsw aeBiwrsTcq Sift f3fi^\ytodB "i ©o-ru-iilV: 

sxf:? *jB£f:t i'd'OJCTCi'-nop srft ia^gdhLstti sxW' lo 9fnl;f erf:t ;t£ aoiiXi-ao 
\ ^Ilctf.a 5-0 eorteastq edf o& gnXvo ,'t6nltf'fli2X';up Ber eax/oxf gi^iXX-rivLi 



pox; that -.vatr-r pipss had been frozen, -arid were bursted., :u,r.d had 
dampsnsa. some of ton plastered vroJ.ls, cf t'tie house, and had oauced 
some of th3 piaatsrinr to fs-li; and that hsos-use o' -^he fcurating 
of the vmtor pipes, thsrs v-Tic :5*v?ral fest of '.vcter in ths osllar 
c-v bass:r3nt oz fne house, '.vhich mads it very 'unsar.ita.ry./ Ui'^st 
t:i^ oiroun-stanocs related,— i..f_ av;- -;: les had -^ht- ,..r:r^:hr'^:c^ re>d\ind 
th':i contract, and z^e^bver hack >ii,e oon-sid-^ration which Jzud^cos^sn 

"It iG a familiar p-rinciple that at lav; '-he ti;r.^j fixed Cor 

the perf orrr:ance of ?. oontraot i-> ieerred the esasnce of the jcn- 

(tract; and generally, if the se.isr ic not reaiy azij abla to psr- 
•i 
ifcriD his oart cf tf.-, a'-,'r£snient , on ths day, the purchaasr r.ay 

lelect to consider the contract at an end." Morgan v Herrick 

Aiuir. 21 IJl. iSl; Tylsi' v Ycun^^, 3rd. Soairi. 444, Th? santis -^rin- 

cipls -.vas uph:5jd "cy cur Supr^i-e Ccvxrt in the oaae of Guerdon v 

Corhett, 87 lo-i. 374; 7/iison v Daunr.an, SO 111. 453, 3ind Eonnsttv 

Glattfeldt, 13C Ul, 175. Ana this 3ourt .leli, in the oass- of 



Bernhardt v Trinr.ols, 45 lil. Ape. 5S, that -^hsre a party 



1- n -* 



or refuses to :.on"ply ■.■dth the tsrar-a of a contract, tlie o-^.her 
party .t^ay r'-sciriul ini refuse psrfcr.-r.anos on ais part. Ths facts 
and circu.r.fctanc&6 in evidence, clearly indicate that :::.\^?llant 
was not in position, for a Ion" tirt;3 after March let. 191-i-, tc 
carry out f.va tsr^is of his contract; t:at at the tiire r^^oaired 
by hiG contract, he ■■■s\& not able to "urn over tc a"pe3ie3, ths 
pOb£asaion of the preraiaes; and that th? premises w^r^ r.ct in £;ood 
habitahls sanaxitsB or sanihary condition, nor in th5 condition 
of rspair required by the contract; and ^-hat aj"?£ll9s, -vhc .vas 
able and •aillinv; to perform, and offered to perform hts .:art 
of tlic contract, had a right, therefore, to rescind it; and 
to de.i'%ni a return of the arount of the consideration which 
appellant had received fror^ him; -.-.nd that upon a-pellant'B re- 
fusal to return the consideration, had the legal right to sue for 



ijsd baj: ibBtatssd ©isw bnjs trtesoil need hBd aaqxq i-As-v 7j^.: : jyoq 

lo"? ^sxl!: emit srft' wjsX d-ifi ^^rf* oXqionli^? ic^iXXniel & ai rfl" 
-leq 0* sicfjs Xrijs y'^bst d-on ai n^lL^^ srlt li t^XX^iansg f>ns ;?D^aj 

-nlicj srr=r.£ erfT ' .±^^i .m£.c3 .iriS ,aaJJoY v isXifT jXS^ .XXI X£ .amJbA 

V noti30C to 96£0 sxl.i ni d-ii/oO sra3ii:M/8--'ijJo ^cf JbXsrfqj;; a£w eXqio 

VifJsnnoa i)n£ t£ei> ,XXI oe ,naffii/i3a v nosXiW (i^VS .XXI T8 ^J^:^scftoO 

lo eaj20 6ri;t nl «cXsf. vtiuoo elrlj- LnA .SVX .XXI 081 .JibXel^fJ^XO 

aXX£^ 'C^-xxiq i5 sr.srfw f^flt «ea .qqA .XII 3^^ ^eXcfmiiT v *X)i£ii0Taa 

«sxfd-b erli' «#oBitnoc .e ly easis^ 9£{;f ff*ir ^{XqnKoo o;t aaeulsn lo 

ej-ojs"i srfT .^^'r£q eiil no aon^Miolieq esjjlsi fcn^ ttnloesT ^^sm x^^-sq 

d-rc^XXeqr^ J^rfi- sj'iioiXini \f.i:xjsoXc ,8on®.biv© ni aaonjsd-a - ' ca£ 

oit ,£-XGX ,;taX rfcx^M istiis sarid" jnoX & lol ^flox:tX8oq ru ^""ox: e£V 

Ijs'xtx/psrr ami: J srfi^ d-^ d-^ri.+ '^ojaaJnoc eirf ^o crBis* ©cf;}- *juo y^C^*© 

erf.f ,asX.L«q-.c ot levo niur od" sicfje ton a£W Off ,«t'OJBad'noo airf ijcf 

fcooj rri tort J'^sr aeeimerrq srLt i-^rft fcfl£- fseaimsaq arfd" ^o noxeesesoq 

noiliJbnoc grl:! ni: icon ,noxJtbnoo icrcdin^e ao *aBi4jtiiJi»Xi aXcfjsrf'ldJBil 

B£W orfv- ^selisqq^ *£r::'- brtxj jJo^utnoo axid- ^cf fcsaxupei aXiiqei 1o 

■ ' '^ijeq aXxf m:tolieq ocf beisllo bnjs ,iBio!tT6g oJ- jniXXlvr Xcfx 

£iffj5 ;;ti Ijnloeei oJ tSao^eiSilcf (d'xiaii js Jb«rf t^fo^iJrtoc " j 

xlolxfw noli"«ioiilBnoo irfJ !io drofomjE srft lo fluwrfea * ina. i ;^^ oi- 

' noqu i • iioixf noi'i £)&v " Jb^xi' ln*XX,»qcfi 



and recover the amount d^e hlx,, in an action o': assuiriosit . 
Ths ;jud.2rrent should thersfore oe affirmed. 

Affir.'"3d. 






♦ Jbsspfri'ilA 



^tvt ,'.4,. 



i: :v ;. .. -> e 



>': 






■.; uii i V 



' : ^; T jt c. 



..'., ;;?;: 



.1 .. ,0 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) _, 

SECOND DISTRICT. ( ^^' I. CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Coxtrt. 



.ii\i,.> ;j^ ■'•'■■} ]■■ :'y-'-' • ■ ^MM-jf! ; 



■••1" 






m 









AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, ^' 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nijie hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of;the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon, DUANE J. CARNES , Justi|3e. 
Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justice. ^ rv X 

1 r; A A I 



CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerfc. ^^ 

r 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. | 



\ 



\ / 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

i L,.' o the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
f ol lovnng , to-wit: 



ym 



;--'9}^rl has bethc^d 9fs.cn bc:t ^i:•-'■': v.. v .'■■.oj luo lo tj5=v 
i03i ill lo oisi'd. en'i'lo JoxTJaiQ bnor,&3 ^di tol bne 

■\7Aa .N5 .2 



no : .t iw~oj , a'—- " 

'v^^ij-'?/! bnp sbiow , . : soil:' 



Gen.llo. 3133 

Anra ICoepks, Admrx. &c . appellee. 



va 



A.-rpeul from Reck Island. 



C y, R If . I ^,, St P 4., Ry . Co. capp e 1 1 an t • 



Nisiiaus, J. 

This v/as /ui Vction or lh2 c::-Sc co;''i;-iior3osd in The circuit 
court of Rc^ lalaoii County, Dy the ..-'ipi-sllNes, Ann Kocplcs,/ \ 

Administraltrix ci -heXe^'cjits of o^r husband X-ra-a-n '(oepite, da» 

/ \ -■■ \. 

dcaaed, Against ths C. PL I. & P. Ey. Coffipany, 'H^ps^ian^t, for Nneg- 



ligcnifly ouuaing the Ssa.t\Vsj/i her husband, who '.va-3^5u>'5.'r:ploya oi 
app/llint A^ It tal alleged in the ie:;l irs.ticn, that the deceased 



\, 



was killed -.vhil^ sn^aged a^ Car Inspector' i; he_l^iT, in ths iin-^ 
of hia duty, by the negli^rindss of 2pp^l±arrt-»~s-. aarTanta; •^nh tha 
liability ox -aji^eJ-LaJit -fea- oassd u.:on ■:hs provisions of th3 Fsderal 



Act ±;:i.%ting to t-.e liability of cQT.nion 



atate buainaaa, to heir sinploys^ 



'iers ergagsd in intsr- 



.La.X- 




vants, 30 Gdg:li;-v:ntly ir.anagsd a awitch angins and ths aritchlng 



which Na,B lone 'o- 



A 






nta in conn-rction -n-ith the 



distribution of a string of cars, arour:d sc'r.c o'' ^'hich ths ds- 

o ased was sitployed; aliO that a,a.i-i^.4srB4' Hs aervanta, .«.'ho were 

A 
managing the awitching and the switch sngine, at the ti-re in 

qUwdtion, -id not 6;c-.;rci30 vsasonable care to ascertain -.VLifther 

ths decsased .vai indan.:£red by 'rheir vvcrk, nor ^ivg hiir. r.ny wann- 

in--, of the danger iv.currsd; acd that ar-r» • : J l - an t - * n ^arvanta n3gli- 

1 
gently failsd to set the braksa of ths string of cars in cueation, 

and that thsriby thsy ?;ot iuto motion, unaxoectsdly ,. and ran into 

the deoeaaed. 

Th3re waa :. trial by jury, Ahich reaultsd in a vsriict finding 

the apt'-sllant guilty, and asssasing the dar.agsa in the sum of 

^:720Cj tind the damages were apportionsd ec^ually bet'ireen Anna Koepke 



.tioslsl :foofl !noi"i IxsqcA bv 

i'^i/cilc sri^ ni fceoasfRri^oc se-co srlit no aaiiojl nX b-cw axrfT 

f^b ,8iq60>' njEffiiejr JbnjBCfGjjri i\n' lo e<f£j6s/sri-; 'lo xiixfeid^einimiA 
-gar/ 101 .i'^n^I-sqqi/ .Y'tJsqraoO .^H .'^•,:2, ,1 Jl ,0 ©rfJ tfenxcg.' ' ,t9B££i) 

\ y \ / V 

^-^ I0 s^oXqms sauar Exrvr oxIiR «Jbxi£dajjfi' isi; "iXijsiisBt sdt a"-^*^^^^ ^XlLTegJ:! 



^nlX ©ri:f rri ^aeq^srl •toi-csqani ij^O a£ Jbag^gns eXirfw ijeXXlal e£W 

X£T«£>8l sri:t lo enoisivoiq Su:" ao^iu bea-ecf -ear tsi&S i 9qc>n- lo Y^-tiitf-e-t-C 
-Tstni rrx be^jBgne ai9lT:fj2C nomrnoo Ic ^;txXicfj£iX Sild o:t gnlS-^Xet ^cA 

.eevoXqms zlsil ' oi .eeenxeud" sdrle 

erfj- djtv noxtopnnoc rtx etiijcvisfe • 6 '-*-ft*Xi>^^s^^ vd saot a£v\ rioirir 

-et Bni riolrfw lo sraos x;.-ii/0"i^; «6i£c lo sn2ii"e £ lo aoL^futiliiaib 

aiew oriw ^sJ-nxrvTse a-*-^fi«i-i4q*« iijrf* o«X£ iiJSYoXqme s^w i)ee£ 

h 

isriitefiT.' ai^iisoac ot 5i£0 sXdxnoaisS'x ssiouxe ton cxi ,nolte£jjp 
-na£7/ Y^i^' =f'Jtri svjtr ion tiiov;' axacM \6 ijais^njecns . 6jbw Jbsfe-iisoejt sxiJ- 

,rcoii"e9irp ni bz£0 lo sniiita silt lo eaiiiicf Sff,t *se oJ JbeXXx;! Y-t-^^e; 
Oiat nxji X^r . YXtsitosqxsaw ,floxiom o;tiiJt ;tog Yer'* YCfc-^s^o" *£rit, tax 

• tse^i&oefc exit 
3nli>njtl JoiX-rsv r rti tstXjJUSi rfciriw »^^i^t ^° Xusliif x- sjbw siedT 

^o mue etii nl eegjarr^eij srft gnleteee^ Jbnjs .Y'^^J^^a *n£iXeqiq£ erft 



the n'idow, and Helen Koepke, :;hs only child cf the deceased. And 

th'"-. Jury .nade a speci';.l finiiii^,: to the si'fect that the total :u'V;OUnt 

of daffiage-3 auiTsrsd was *3000. and that thay daducted .j/GOO therefrom 

for contributory r.-3f]^li;::£nce of which tnsy fcuxid ths decea.asd r,uilty. 

Judg.Ti3nt v,':a3 r-i-dersd on ^he vsrdiot, ..nd u'on i peal, it ^ attacked 

principally on the ground tuat ths cauae cf ihs death of h.^z-cllosra - 

intsstats -.vas a part o" the risk und dangsr assuiT.sd by hi.Ti, "by 

his contract of -sifiploymsnt; that ths da.tiags^^ "^s*-. excessive; and 

that the jury iho found taat ths appsr:i,s„ftJU) intent its ■^■%5 guilt y' 

'\ 
of contributory nsgligsnco, did not deduct a -^uf f izisntiy largs 

proportion from ^'h'j whole .iricunt ol (l-Xia-Q^B four.d» on account of 

s uoh c o at r ibut ory n e gl i >3 s nc "j <k 

The proof she Y^V^tJiat th5 d^ccassd, in tijc sarly iiicrning 

hours of ths day c:^ the accident \hich riatultcd in hi a i'^ath, ".ua 

sng'X^sd in work perfc.iining- to his employment, as h-^lp^^r or a.aist- 

ant to the car iniosctor in'^ a ^- jg'clljin t ' ■» railroad ynrds; the y-vrda 

being; cituated oppcsiti to, and north of ths passsngor jtation 

at Reck Island. At the tirn^ mintionsd, thar-s was u string of three 

mail cars aai four p^-ss^n-^cr coach^a, standing on the side track 

designated aa nuatao:" 3, "/hioh was cha fourth track north of ths 

3te,tion. The3S care anf coaches, in 'h-^ ragular cour:»s cf tt^i^tfi— ■■=■ 

"I L>ii>V< h paasvingiir aervioe, -.ver.^^ to be in:i02ct3d and Jiatributcd 
'\ 

amon3 various tr?,ins to which they w-3ri to ba attached. T/:-= de- 

ceaaed wao .liaiGtini-j in inspecting and '-^.stting one of thia string 

cf cars .7iention«d, a mail car, rsady to cs 3v/itcheJ and attaohed 

to ■apo a llnftt' a pasaengsr train ^c* 39, v»hich wa.i hound for Kanaas 

A 
City, Mi.^souri; hs had just h-jlpsd tc couple this :':ail car to the 

road sngine, ■".liich was r eady to switch the oar to train I-lc, 39 

and the 3ngins had /roved it about 4 or G f et from the ctAs: oar:, 

the.t had bssn l3ft ataniir.g or. 'he traok. After theT.ail car had 

bcirn coupled tc the road engine, tne deceased he'^an ths vcrk of 

teatift^g the -.vhegls or other retal parts cf the mail car, and the / 



bnk .JbeejESosL Bdi lo fclirfo -{lao s:::' ,83lq9o3 nelsH tns tHOblf .&dt 

inoils'isr:;t CCSil JbetojjJbsJb \;©r(j- ;f-jH£f^ irrx .0008$ e^-.v ^JSiSAiire Qs-gsmsL lo 

,vi-liu3 Jb96JS5csfc 3rit tnx/o'l ysni riciriiy lo sonagJtXge-a. Yic;j0cfi:rr4^O!j ^9^ 

Jbeiost^jc ftt d-i ,l£sq":i; no-jj bc:^ ^tottrev s*ri.t no JbeisJbn?n B£Vf i-nsir.gJbxjL 

^8\'»oIXoo:nr to richjssi crid^ lo eeujso srf;J^ tjEiid- Jbnuoig. s^^ no ■^XIjBqicnJtiq 

\ JXiug 6JBW Bist&oint sXt^lLegc^e sriu ;fBrf;f bauot Offw ^iUQ^sri;f ifjsdd- 

.:• ■■ ,--•- ■ '' ■; •■ .:.: . : ^' . .• ' ,:..t -c 

oSi£X x-Cd-n^i^'i'^'5"J>'8 £ ^oufceij J-oa bit ,90xieslXs3n \;io^iJcrJt7;fftoo ^ 

,. .: . .... ,. ■' ' -■ '■' ■ ■;.,-; ;i: •. • _ '^ - ''r. . . .1^ 

\o itnuoooa no ,i!iiirol eeg^iitGi) lo Jnuoas sXorfw o£!L;f, moil. noXJioqo'iq 

-.-.:■■•■■-■ ■ .^-^^ ■•■-• V-.- ;; :■ ■ \ 

^eonejlXgsrr ^ocfiixti'rd'noc doue 

■■ '. : ■ ' '^-■'- - >- ,, , : .:..: ...._ .. jL 

gnimom \fX'i.£© srfcf nX tl>«ei5S08X' srf;^ d-jerft^t^voxfe looaq erfT 

exvr t/f^jb-er eiri nl bttLufUri doidfi taQbioo^Bdi to.-jjj^ . eiuod 

"tBleiii TO ifeqX?rf ejE .d-nsmyoXqms aid od 3nXn2£d-asq iiow ni £)eg£axi© 

a£)a£Y srf^ lefiiJSY b^ciltat <sHrtt«±inh^^ ai xotcsaaab ibq srfJ- o* ta-a 

, ' ■.-. ^ - ,- .;:H.' :; ■^. . . 

noiS'^d'e iosn8«e£q sxi^t -o diiaa pn£. ^oi ;ii'icoqqo teJ-jaucMs ^nlscf 

eertfiit 10 grriai^B J3 saw oiedt ^JbsnoXifnem ecnXd- Qdf tk .hnjeXal :{o:-5I *£ 

iojc-i* eiile odi no gniLr.x^fi ,e6doiioo aegneee;5q xt/ol Jbn£ 8T£c Xi^m 

©rid- I0 diioa x'o£id dvt:rxio1l. si::- sjsw xlolriw ,£ isdmun e/; ■beizn:^t&eb 

-— Xe qg a iO eciuoc i£Xi/sei edf ni ,B9do£oo' f^nB eaac ©esiiT .nol*£*e 

bs>iudtitBlb bcu- b&iosocal ©d od ei©w ^aoiviea •i9gnsBB£q © i Viir ' 

-oJb Si.T .JbsrioiJJdjE ea' od- eiew ^snd doidr.' of ani^id- eyoXij?v snor:-. 

gnXid-© sxrid zo ©no gnXd^d^sj^' ijnr gnXj-ooqani al '^ciit(i,tai:£ sjsw i©S£©o 

Jb©riO£d-cf£ Jbtijs fcsdod-iw* ©d oJ- ^^j^sei ,ibo Xlijm £ jfcenoitnsx «T£o 1. 

©JsenfiM io\ basjod ££w doidv.- ,6S .oK nix.!* :£Egn98a£q B 'inBXj i» Vo ^ o;f 

8d* Oi TJbo Xijbit: Bldi siqjJO'j ocf JbsqXsrd ^sifj; bxid sd jXTx/oesjtM ,\:*xO 

es .051 ats-ii od tjeso sd* doil^va ct ^(1)j39 1 sjer doid-- .©nisns b£QZ 

,rT£o -eAifo 9di aiozl tf'l B ro ^ tuods it isvo.Tr bsd snlgns Bdt bci£ 

tAd i£c X2£mynd leSlA .^ojbt* trll- no snl£n£*e t\sl n?ed Jb£d *£d* 

io :Ciow BdJ n£-2&o' fc9e£90sJb sc'.i ^snt^at b£oi ^/t ji beLquoo nsad 



click Ox the ha-tmer ■A'-hich he v,'as luirig for tliat purose, had been 
hsard ^ust iv,.-^^- lately ■.:;eforc- he ■.-.'as ^ciiled. At this ti.re, ancthsr 
switching crew was operating it f .3 c'rher, or easterly 3rd of th3 
string of oara, :-j.n-' coaches irsnticnsd, r-narj-y t'-'O blocks away, 
for the pur;oa3 of detaching t\j-o co:ich33 therefrom » 

■^ This e vIU-b ' nu^ juBli ~-^^iia-^3---%-erQ~- inf .- '3 r-ai3jia-^ — feart faring the oreration 
of "cutting off" the coaches in.iu^aticn, at the ea'ist end, tns 
awitch engine, \Thich ^as io'.nK tne ■• orlc, rr:v.;j,.fr--aT«gg. bampei against 
or pushed the sts.nding ar a ,,.— .::aJ:;-ii— uiiHi«ii!»i--^it*a^ 

■=«, n d-''='feJS!*- i '. — : j i t& in e o i ri-»»s^. T ; n . : i e — &f — i«e^- -whw 



th= vhola body of the rercaining oara aawhsttrwila. To^''ed tov.'.?rd5i the 
car at which ths SiT.-^f3l'le9~ii intestate wa.^ •orking, who apparently 
did net notice the a:;rroaoh cf theas cars, :-..nd wae caught bet-veftn 
the buffsrs c" the approachin-;- cars, s.nd th'; car 3.round ".'hich ne 
was at -s-jork. 

It i ; C"isar- =4-fea4 jths Bettin(;, c:' ths string of cars in 'r.oticn 
was ths r suit cf the action cf th;:- s'.'^itchiri,^ crew, at tne east 
end, and wae an unusual occurrence, and hsrsfcre unexpected; 
it i l i . — 5 - v4 4g n-t -A 1-so-t ■ - t ■•rSbt' (^ proper and uaual proaecuticn cf the 
awitcning operation, of "cutting o£J" thess coach33, 'vouid not 
have resulted in setting "he r5;nainder of thia string of ccach9S3 

and cars in motion. [ I-fL.,tii^ -getting of f\}4' csrs in f?:«4idi,„Yia3 _^ 

an extraordinary or unutiual \ncid?nt in the vork cf switching, 
it is clear, t^at th3 decsased\did j;i'bt assa^.e the riak and danger 
thereof; it ■:\-.a only the oriinarVani u;:ual riaks '-.nd dangers of 
hi3 employn-^nt, -vhich he had a/sumed. And if the accident '.tas 
causad by the act of t:e epf'ginesr cf\he switch engine, in 
striking the body of the car© in questiony^ ,"ith extracrJinary 
and unaeoessary force 21'na viclerce, and sucfi\force and vioi:nce 
cauaad the string; oy cars to be aet in rrotion, '■<^nd the deceased 
was ther'=;by killed^, auch act -.rculd amount to negiigenc©, and the 



T9rf;tonjB ,3rf;li- airft ifA ijbsIIl^C a/sw'bd siible'J t-Cd^jfel-'srriml Ifauf; tt£Sil' 
- z^^£^£ Qjloold o\v& "{Imsti ^bBaoiiixBir. 89irojBbo"t'i:ii3 iiB'ii5'5°^6"sn-i 'i^e 

1. -c^.t^^ Qi a ».s- -i ^ ., . _• 



YX3"n3ijsqq£ oxiw ^gnii^io?/ a,ev/ si-jacfesirix alA3l-i«^^ erlt "rfO^irrfw tx! Tj&t)' 

xiasTPd-s'j ^trfgyso Qjgw Mx t'ttiio^ s'sT^'dif ^6' rfbjSoiq'-t^J* erft serf ton '^on tlij 

&il rioiriv? haiiQi.& tt^o eri:^>" i)as ^axfio gnirfo^'fq'qi!" "S'rf^^ fo eisl^trd ?!<■+ 

{i)sd-c©qx©xn; erioleasd;- finLii'^oons-Hi/ooo liu; suriij ii£ sew brt£ »£«l* 

exfrf lo flciituosBO'iq Ij3iiSjj ibng 'lia'qdVcy jg|''-i N af fih'' , 6a X j» ■ J-ngi» - i V9 a i ' tl 

too. bLuor ,eerio.eoo eeericf "SAo gnilJ-tyb'' Vo «n6ilf'fiTSqo gnixloj-iife 

aexfo^oo >o gnxita einFlb VelJjftTjsme'i erf- anX;f*s8 ni ^bed-Xxfe?? sv£rf 



^grtirfod-lwa I0 aliow srid- \t &a'ibloay XsunLfou 10 \:xBniJt-iou3it9C9''nlc" 
lo aasgrtjel) iDiJS?. aijfeii x'lflysli-' jfcns)<r^ J 2 ;iosT;sriJ 

•^^ ■■'■■ ■■ ■ ■ ., -y^\^ ■ ■. - ■;■■:■■ ^ ■ - 

e^iff d-nsJbiooa exit 1i baA JoaiuweXa bed erf rfoixfw ,ffl£"'f?tdTqnfd"'eJW 
ni lertigns xfotiwa sri/'lto isoni^e" ^f" lo 'fo^'hdf ^fcf l3©ex/£c 

•oxisXoiv &ftjs so-xo^/aoi/e fin* «oo.aaloiv Mils; ©blcJl Yl^jgaaeosanu Jbfi£ 
Jbae^soeJb erf* ba^tOQi&oni ai iae scT bt aiabNlb sniite si-ft tjeeuxso 
Sj-f' Ini-. ,©ont^;oj:Xasn oj Jm;ora£ MjJ0vr";)-6£ ^'itei/e ■)*©XIXJr"'t<^^*«rf^ ^-s* 



decsassd oil not aaaume the risks and dangers of such neglieenoe . 
Devins v C. R. I. & ?« Hy. Cc , lo5 lil. App» 438; af-'^irxed in 
3CC 111. 348; LlattoclLS v G. & A. Ry. Co. 1S7 111. A.-c. 539; Monrlou 
V N. Y. N. H, Ry. Co. 3^3 U. S. 1; 0. ^ I. T. Ry. Cc. v i^iits, ZOd 
111.134. N^r Jc3£ the law in^pcae a duty upon one to an+ioip^ts 'he 
negligence cf others. It is a presu^ncticn ci law, that rv-sry per- 
son '.vill properly perfcrra th© duty, which ic snjoined ucon hiir, 
by law or imposed by contrict. VcF^rland v Jaokaon 139 I.-1. App. 453. 

It is hardly neceaeary for the purrose of this dsoiaion 
to disousa at Idn^th, ths qu^ation, Ahethsr or net the d3C3?.s3d 
was -juilty of oontributory negligsncs, by being en the railroad 
track, and det.vsen t.-s cail car r.nd the rs-T.aining string of cirs, 
3t ths time hs --T-.a killed» But 3. proper dsterrrination of that 
quss'ticn, -^ould involve tahing into consideration at least two 
eleiEsnts, namely, whether f-he decaaaed, at the place "rhere '-js r^aa 
killed, -vas performing the auties of his errploym'-nt; and, v/hethsr 
he could, by the exercise of ius cara, have anticifated or noticed 
the approach of the cara oicving towards him. T'lere ia no direct 
evidence to throw any positive light u^on thsss inquiries; it rr.ay 
proi'srly be emphasized, however, that there is also no eviienoe 
from V7hich ths infertnca could Cc. juatiy drawn, that the jeceased 
was not, at the tixe he -n^^i killed, acting in ths iii;s of hie 
employrr.ent ; :--nd from the nature of hie employ.rGnt, the rr.src fact 
of his being or. t.ie track, and between the care, vYould not, of 
j itself, De negligence. Whether, a.8 a n-.atter of fact, the appellant 
was guilty of the negligence charged, and v/hether or not ths de- 
ceased wae guilty of contributory negligence, .vere queetiona 
for the jury to determine fro/n the evilence. (Tulo v O'Gara Coal 
Co. 183 111. A;.p. 433; Devine v C. F. I. & ?. Ry. Co. supra.) 
Ths matter of contributory negligence, xir.der '■he Federal 
Liability Act, do^s not bar the right of recovery, but aimply 



, ■B0a$2^-^'S^^ rfC'jje lo eassfl^ fcnjs aisii ant eaiuea^ ioa bit LQ»£to9b 

^,,.., ni tex-ir^Js iSSi^ .qqA .III cSX . oO .^P -^ * .1 ."^ .0 v eaivsa 

yo^noM iSSa ^qqA . Ill TSI .oD .yH .A A .0 v e:Ico*^t£M jS^S .XII.53S 

eOS »9jlrfW V .OO .';H .1 .7. i .0 il .8 .U £t£ .oO .iH»H:*K-.y .5! v 

scft 9*/-'7iol:'n£ ot sno Cioqu yd-i/i) j^s seoqxi wjrI srft ssoL tcK .^SI.III 

-tceg Y^svs j-jsrfcf "',¥43l lo noid"Qmus9;xq £ el il .aasrf-j©--lo doa^jllgsn 

.•niri noqjj t»xi2o(;ns sx rfoiifw t^cfut ©rich aiolisq xli&qoiq Iliw aos 

£5f'' .qqA .lil 961 fxpSicjsL v bael'i^'tLoM .^Oii^^noo ^d fcaeoqrai lo w^X x^ 

fioieioei) elriit^o 9eoaxit5q.sd.t lo^ Y^Jseesosn '^IJbijerf si ;tl 

jbeeiBsosb sri;t iJ-orr ip xerite^A ,noJ:^8=>xfp *s4^, t^i^^a*,X ^jb eeaosiis ot 

Jb£OTll£i silt no ^aiQ4 xd ,©onssi.Xsaxi ^aoJ-ucfi^iiTOc^lo X^-'^iJ^S ssw 

,stc£o io gniTd^e 3ai;ax£.T3T ariif .biiij ijcp ^lijsis.sd^ aeaw^scf ^ns jio*^* 

-^ itffj* 1o aotisatmrs&sb isqonq ^ *jja «I)aIXl:iI b^w eri ami* .«ri* ts 

. owd'^sj^slji'js iioxi-jsasljlanoo oia.t ■gal:isi svloviii tlJUo«v ,aol*asi;p 

8£ff srf sisrfv; so^Iq arft tB ^bBSBSoeb iid:f TOxli'Silw ,\cl©ji£n ^ad'nQaisIs 

leriJ'srf'.v jljnjB idrremxolqma eirf lo esiix/I) sri* §niinao'iaaq flJBW-=tI>6lIli 

i)90id-on TO betaitotias evjBri ,ei£a 3ut lo saiooaxa arf:; ^cf ,i3XjL/o& Qd. 

toartb oa ex sisxfT .mxri ai)iBwo;t giutvoin aijso ©ril /io rioj30iqc^s sxl* 

Y-S'f --t [estTtsjpnl eaeri-t noQU itrfgil sv£Jii,oq "iOG vioid& od- .,JBpn©x>iV8 

acnorivs on oel^ ei axerft ijs^it ,xevswori ,i5ssie,sriqifle scf -{li&qoiq 

beBSbOBb edi i^di- «rfw«xb vltfax/j; acf Jblwoo sorteie'ini arid- riolriw morrl 

8lri 'io. onil ari.d^^ ai ^nid-o-e ^bslLM B£W ed 9.v>l& &di i& .Jon 8£w 

JojbI oieai 8rf:f , JnsnYOlqiTJS sxri "Jo siuj^xj edt moil iinis .4«fn3miioIqm3 

, /lo ^io^. Jbluow ,aT:;30 ©n'd aa9w;ted ti\£, ^:S.os.1i Btii no -galdp eid. lo 

^ci£liez'l-^ 8A;t 4J0BI lo Ted'^am £ a^ ^-isri^erlW .eone-gllgsn ed ,lla6tfl 

-at 8ri:t iton 10 lerfd^sriw iinjs ^JjasxjEXio sonajilisen 9d4, lo-^CjfiJtw^ e£W 

Brroxd"asx;p aisw iSonsaJtigaxi X'^'^^'^cT-^^^^'^o "^^o ^^Xlijg ajew Lsejseo 

I^oO JBiJsO'O V oIwT) .oonei^ivs adJ- inoi?: dijiraieitJ^Jb o^ x^J^C *^*' ^^'^ 

(.jBiqufi, .oO t^H .<? =& ,1 .fl .0 V snivdC i££ir ,q.;A .ill czi .oO 

Isrsbel pdj ■%Bb;as ,©oflss-£iS®^ X^oi^ucfiztnoo lo -istftfiflj odT 

Xlqniie itxicf .^TSVoosT lo i-rfgiT sriu 3£qf J-pn asob «JeA X^^XicfaiJ 



affsots fae amount cf damages -vhich Tiay be r3cov?r3dj -rni unfsr 
thio act, damages ire to 03 iiininiahed 'oy the jury, in prc'ortion 
to '-he amount of nagligsnce attributable to "-he S!nploye« If the 
deosc».3ed n3.2 really guilty of contributory negligancs, it must 
have osen regarded by the jury as slight; but ^.ae extent of aach 
oontributcry nsglirsnoQ, and ths proportionate diminishing of 
da-iiagee, in oonseciuanos thereof, were questions for tne jury to 
detsririne; and .vs oannct say, that ths iury improperly determined 
eithsr tue question of contributory nsfrlia^noe cf the daceased, 
or the amount to bs allowed thersfor in iiminuticn of damages & 
?/e ionot rsg.rd the amoxint of the damages allowed as excedaiva, 
under the facta and circui-istances present sd by the evidence; nor 
"-were the damages improperly adjusted between the parties to whom 

they accrued* 

\ 

There is no substantial error, either in -^he verdict of tha 

jury, or the judgment cf the Court. The judgment is therefore 
affirmed. 

Affirmed* 



r^ktisj has: iJbsievo.oea ecf. \:jefr cfoixfw eagjeai^ip 3;©, d^ru/oax tdt .titogll^ 
ttotinororq at lY^^^t ^f^'l^ \cf^t9>:isiiaX!ci.t sp o;f, ©it 8ag£cr£i; «^o«. ^iilt 

lo gnirisirrirnxL sd'^noxtioqoTq ent i.C£ »©on&gi;is&iT \-io:JjJdi;i«CQO 
oiT '{iJJi, sfltf.'jGj enox36©jEjp sisw ,i.oeusrf^ ©QKSJjpSfeaoo cil ,6es£ifcjBi5 

jSes^raBJb lo nol^x/rilaiftJp at rotenBiis havolL^ stf 0? iJ-xo/ome snit f© 

■ fcoriw o* e©ioi«Q ©fit aeswci-eJ JbetfsjjQJb* '{Xisqoaq-iai eagjEnjei.- ©rl^ st«w 
erid" to ^clfcisv sxf"? 0i "xsri^ie ,ion8 Xxxcfns^teaus 0x1 si saartT 



i. i ri ■ c u) ;■) ^ i 



.l«:i av 



.eiv 



c juiDir©!* !^x; 



jismii il£ 



00 1., j. ^ . cr /^ -' ' ,x,; ; •:'■;:' ri .idii' 

:>. -.:.: .- •" ^ ,• ■ vji :,-•>. ;; ■ : v; ^-u;/,. ;;. r tot- '; 
; '' ■ . ; .'i'-.' io t ;■■ ■* r i;v i'l *- &<. , i'J"; '''5 > 

', ..;ii:i..j^ ,v''" ."/i .*? '' .1 .-i .^ V t 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) _ 

SECOND DISTRICT. )' ^"^^ I, CHRISTOPHER O. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Reci^rds 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoino- is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this ^ 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



n \^< 



A -.d.T •).• -Jioi") :('i\"\\\Q. :-.) ii:j 



/■♦•jiiio vm ;ij !.' 



o 



/ 



' Jl 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice. 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. | 



2 



-^ 9 l\ t, t^l 



Jk) 




V 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
APR 1 4 1916 the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



STAJJ' 

; -cfT no ■) is b. 
. rns bsibawn 'jni.. 
-.1111 lo 33,6J8 erf.-i lo i'o.ii.tsiQ hL 

-■^^•pr:*suL -^'fifciS9-c<I ,8UAHSIJ1 .M .. 



no ;J:w-OT . sbiBW'19 j''is • 
se-iu-^Jl has sfcTOw srli n'i aoill^ 



Gen. No. 5150. 

The People ex rel John Pritt, 

appsliea 
^, ■, vs ^. A"?o2al ''Torr. ?taph.er)3on» 

School Dirsctors etc. apysiiant. 

/ On Nuvduibai" 7, 'loll» John Britt,i[ aa rcla^r fiied in i\i<i >- 
c-ij-G- ui ' fe ■ G -e t t r t ' o £ G t ap h i n a on ^ HJ o un t y -ar-py ti LlTn a-Tainst the 

rf 

3cl'iccl -iir-ictpra, of District No. e-i-gM-y-aJra* in S'-ephsiidon 
oouTity,, to require aaii .iir-:ctcrd to ac'crove the aalection 
made 'q-j him o? tiie Freepcrt high school in dis-triot no» OB-e "^ 
humxre^i— tft^— CojitjL^Jii a a n .ye in 'he oa,rri3 ^cwn for his ©on, 
John J. Eritt, -ni to pay "r.e tuition incurred --nd to be in- 



'■«4A:,|JU#i 



curred J"cr ^ne attendance o|_„:jaid child at said high school 

during the current school year* -,^The petition alleged f-.at ^. 

Brltt was u resident) ■xVii. tax payer cf aaid liatrict 'Mc. e lg'A'ty -^ ""> 

»tee and was the father of a-.id child and that ;.aid chili y/ae '^^ 

v;'ithin the school age ar.d lived -^^ith him ani ^hst as waa 

responeible "or the c?re, nurture and education of said 

child] \nd a'^.id p;titicn . et up th2 statute of 1913, entitled 

"'An act to provide Jar high .^ahopl privileges for ara-vjatpa , 

of the eighth grade, "tr The pstition all-ged that district' TTo. 

one hxmdred and forty five i4r&*' south of -'ni contigucue tcjeaid 

district No. eig':ty nine ::.nj li---,^ a high school therein and 

afford^the iri-^rest -nu nioet convenient high school accssaihls 

to pupils of district Ho. eighty nine which oifera?. full 

four years program C-' ^tudy, and 4*, the only "ieh ochool 

in aaid county -.-.ith cacn ."rograrr accessible tc pupils of Jia- 

trict Kitgk eighty nine; "Uat r'iatcr seiscted ^aid high school 

for the attendance cf his child and obtained ths consent 

of the school board cf said high achool for the adrrission of / 

/ 



.OcXe- .oK .CISC 
i&ttrS nrfoL i'rri xs elqoe'I erfT 
esiXscrqjs 






.irtJBiXsqq^ .od'S.^eio^os'iia XoorfcS 






ao& 



" 9-ffo .on toiztBit at Xoorfoe rigirl j-ioqssil srIJ- lo mirf yd stjsm 

,no» airf -ic': rr*ot sw^c an'^ ni evlJI— « i tt ig .„3{j^xa3r-rfefcr-fcyrtnuxf 

-iii sc' o.t Xsn.- Lsaxuoni noicfl-ad- £-1-' YJsq o* tn.P. ^tiirO. .L nrioL 

Xoorloe .rfaiif Jbi-^e *J5 fcXlrio tijea..J[0 ©on£Ljn[s.td-jQ qcL: lo'l tsiujo 

a£w iXlffo i;2£a ii^di bas JbXlrfo Jbire lo lericf^^l srf^ ««w Jbi:j^ «wifl 
a£w 9ff iJ'Eri-' tnx- rairf dt tn bevtl bas: ©§£ Xoorfos s:lt atd^lf: 
btea lO noliJxojjl:.© bn£ etufuja ^etcc s/J- lo': eXcfXsnoqeei 

beLtltcis t£X8X lo ej-^i-^ie scli- qjj Js.. nolixd-eq J&i^B tnx< ;ijXiric 
ee^jEL'i;£iS "Xol .aagsXlylTcs XQori©a, d-siM tc'i sJblvoiq o:t tO£ nA" 

iii56|o* awoi/gid-noo in? '3:o d^fijoe '«.e*i ©vi'i '{rf-iol bas baibnud cno 

Jbac nisTSitt Xoorios djitd .e ^/.-rl .fcnx: »nin xiil-gis, .qV[ totttslb 

sXrfiesscox XoodoB rfslri d-nainsvnoc .iteom Jbri- j-aaijcsn edi^bioTis 



JLlvl c^iello rfcxrfw enXn v;^^'i3-t® 'OH j-oxicfsiL 'io siiqwq o^ 

Xooxloa rlgln' vino Sui- ^^J' i^n.- ,\:tu^e "lo ixusTjOiq BTrs'{ ii/Oi 

-eib lo sXxqixq oi eXcfjtaeaoo^ :n£i-goiq doua d&tv: ^Jnuoo bt&e al 

Xoorfoe d-gid Jbijee. bBtosiou loi'XjX'ii tx5ri.t {enJtn vitf-'gle KxEiix Joii^ 
J-TBsnoo edc^ £)©ni£d-cfo toe i)Xi£fo axri lo eoxiJsLned-J-B arfj toI 

• lo floiseimJbjB Sff:^ To"- Xoorice rigiri jbiosa lo Jbaxsocf Xoorfoe erf^t lo 



r- 



/-^r-*^^^ 



aaia childj t:':.at said child iam a graduate of "^-'is eighth grade 
in 3? id 5.i£trict sigi.ty nine; that the tuition per capita 
of oa.id high achcol ia forty oollare per year, pjiyable 
semi-annua^-ly in advance, rnJ ■ .^tcoo not axcasd the csr capita 
coat of maintaining ^aid nigh school; -^hat -^here %*€ arnpla 
funds in the hands of the treasurer of diatrict Ko« eighty 
nine, and Avft^-^-sui fie lent funds in hie hands on Juiy 1, 1914 
to pay Jiich tuition, .pacifying the a.r.cunts, nr.d in- addition 
thsr to &aid district No. eighty nine Isvisd a tax of rive 
hundred dollars for the genaral expenses of sail district for 
the current year, and that aftsr paying said expenses there 
rvill rsjiain a sun; in the hands of the treasurer; that though 
often requested the dir ctcrs c " o .strict I^o. eighty nine 
refused to grant the trar.sfer cf £aid child, refused to aoprovs 
the selection cf said high school, \nd refused to cay '"he 
tuition ^liargea relator Tor the afrendanoa cf aaiJ child 
at said high achool -^.nd iid this -vithcut iiaking any oTc-ecticns 
to the aslection !3^d ..thout designating any other high school* 
The directors answered, aiTii.ting .xany facts^nd denying 
some of the facts alleged, and stating what sunis they had 
contract ea to pay .luring the sail school year, and t:,at on 
July 3S, 1914, thsy levied a tax cf five hundred dollars 
for schooi par oses for "he ensuing year, -md tViat they ap'rro- 
pri-_tsd said five hundred dollars for certain specified pur- 
posed; nanely, ''gx salary oC teachers four hundred dollars, 
for fuel fifty dollars, for painting school house lorty dollars 
for incidental expenses ten dollre, and ^hat sr-.id child ^ 
in attendanca at said high school. The relator demurred to 
certain portions of said onswer rmd -^he demurrer was -.uetained 
TTr.ofs were heard u on '^"':3 cth^r izsues* and '.he mandamus was 
awarded -lb prayed^ l ani "ht kirootora a '. 'lTSsLi Ih g j. ufi uiiir ^ 






^IQi ,X •'jijJl, no eJbnail ftM nX «Jfcm/t itnpiBlllirsj^^-^' ^ .sain 

»vXi xo xfid" ..fi ife3,i^v«i^ j^aXrt ,Y,*i:3ia «oH ^oXiJ-aX^ iljse 94f:'isn:f 
xol: i^oi1*€ll.£) Jbijse lo aeensqxs X^xsxisg srlj xol ei^XXoJb Jb^xfcauxi 
«• •isdl ae^fisqx® Jbias anXTfJsq, isitl^s .ct£i:'i tns ,iJ8ax; .Jnsixuo 9di 

^ srf-' t«ct 0* feesul*? i5a« ^,l9o4se d'^lU tisa lo. aottoslat edi 

X?Xirfo bijsfi . lo ftonjeJbnst#«-erid- ?0x i:o*jbXsx bd^rsc:. aotilut 

ataotic&ldo y^jb sni:?fi5CD tuodt l^*' Btdt tLb bwp Xoorfoa flgln' £)XJBa^^if.e 

••> Xoorloa rfslff isr;io ^hje anlt^ngieei) tuodiiv tajs aoiiosiSG fdt oS 

- gniyna^. tni^&iD&l Yn^oi gnitv' xiii^jb ,X)9T©wan.'' e'io;/'08xJt edT 

is*;" 'fcjBif ifsn^f BBiue t^ilw gnii^jeJe. i>ae ttegsXXjB e;fojBl srlj io eflios 

.:.,co^,t£iii £inf .xasy Xoorip,a_J;i£}a .-04s^ sfliaufc: ^*q Ou X/S^-Of xJaoo 

8X£XXoX taairijjri evil lo xjad- ja i)©l-V^i. ^aiW ti'Xei ,6£ y-Cj^X* 

L i-iQ^q;ca .\edjt isiit bar ^t^B^x sni^ans pile %p.l bqbo: -xuq Hoqdoe ic'. 

-xi/q Jbeitioooa niJBd-Tdo xol ^jijjXiab LsiJbiiurl avXl fcijsa Jb©,;f.?X'iq 

.. ,ai«XXoX) JbsiLfli/rf luoi BTaxIOjSsd- ^o y'^JsX^b ,. ^<?^ .Y-tein^n ^tteeoq 

iisLIob Y^^o- a«i/oa Xporfos §nX.+ni«q lo'i .aiJsXXo-fc yd'lil ,19^1 xol 

i& bZldo b.is:S, tfid} X^n^ ^aimXXoi xia* aearxaqxe i£^aebtoal rol 

-V. 0* bsfwxiQb tQ^JdlsT »ilT .Xooxfoa rigXii LX^e t£ (ma&ba&i&f. at 

, bectlsitjjs fijBw Tex-jjwmei) sri;' X)«a lewanp JbX^a '3;o axxoXifiqi^ al^iieo 

e-w BJjfliflfcn^in 8rff^.X'iJJ3 ^iswasi 19^*0 ar:-* nou Auaad aiew alojiq^ 

-< aoT lg im f'>--:ft5g?r?^~»rto »o e crJ ifc a J-" Xna l ^©Yi^xq. Sjc< teXx^W£ 



G 




No reason ivaa _-iven in Vhc ar.3iver nor appeared in 
svioence .vhy irhs direotora ahouli net a'provo th? selection 
of the high achcol, nor " Hi the •^.ns-.vsr deny tho^e part 3 cf 
the pstition which showed that it was reasonable that said 
hi eh aohcol should bs ar.^ roved. / TheVorrdsr directin" the 
<^ school o.^ics/^ to a. :rove tag seL^tibm of aaid high school 
was thsToti^Tb^ro'per » ' ^ 

The atatu-{!\e in ::Ue3tion :v ys tnat th* tuibion 0' -juch 
pupila ahali hsVpaid by the li strict in -vhich '■":2y reside 
"from any funds not othsr.viae a prooriated. " ^e are cf op- 
inion t'.is,t it '.vaa not intsnied Tfiy these ivcrds to ooni'sr 
upon the iirrctore o- a school istrict ^ ".e aan:© pc'^er vhich 
the Isgialature and cities have to a'propriate -jpecific funds 
'or certain par,;03ea, but- -hat the r ^fersncs ij to ^he cro 
vision of the '> -antral school law -vhich authorizsa such dir- 
ectore to isvy a tax annually cf not ©xcseding ?. certain 
psr cent tor educational and\a certain per cant "or building 

f purposes. Th3r3for-3 reeponients in cur juigrnent -vers net 
authorized to deZsat the right of. the rf:iator to h?vs "-hs tui- 

. ^ tion of his &cn at ssid high eohool- paid out of the funds of 

the district by dividing ups -^he amount levied for sdjcaticnal 

: ourooses, -ic aa to tea ac rooriate to other pur cssa all th=; 

■ 3uin levied /or eJucaticr.al pur .oses. Kcreover, tha school 
dirsotors could not "iOP.o v in adv'noe vhat the salaries of 
the teaohsra .vouli be for the ensuing year. The pr oof 
was f.-.at '.he taition onarged by said high school c." forty 
dollars per year ii i not ei^ceed tV;.e p=r capita cost of main- 
taining said high school The proof in.'iicatsd ,t'.at payment 
in advance -.raa repaired by raid high achcol, and, that at the 
time 0/ the hearing of this case said child v/as in said 
high school by sxiffarance and liable to be expel lad at any 



noiitosisa ©rfj- •voiq-X! ton Mjtforlif ft^oiceTlt srft TfrfT sons&ivs 
^o et'X,Bq ssQrii Y-'fsii lewejff.*? dfft filfe '-idh ,Ioarfo6 rfglri srft to 

/ \ X - 1 

riotre lo floi*iu* €>fft *<xfd- tYBe xioiteei/i: njt S/d-ift^.tB sJT 

aJbieetr ^or't rfoiriw fil *oiT*ett srit '^fcf £)lBq/scf Iljei-'e' eXiquq 

-qo "50 81J8 sW *> .b^tsttqoioc.ji ael^Tsrfto JMan BtaifJ xac koiI" 

tts^rtoo 0+ etiiow^eerit Y«tf i^si^nstnl jfo^ sjsw ti &s. -^ nolal 

rfoiffw i9woq ©mjse Dt^f fniitel': Xoorfoe jg/Io Bao*o?ilJb erlt aoQU 

&i;m;1 oilioeqe ©t«itqb*tocjB 0* sv^n se^iio tmjs eTtfi-jsIaigsI edl 

•;; QIC »rr.1 oi ct sonsis'ti'^. 3ff;t ^jsac' ^ifo' ,e86ooTuq nijBtiao iol 

\ ■'' 

"lib ticuB s&&iiociisj£ riolriWMrjssI loariog Isarrtss: srij- lo nolaiv 

atcirBO r. 'gntb&BOT& ton'lo vali'.i/nnB xst r Tjvel oJ etoJos 

TiRkhLivc' 10' d-nsc leq rtijBtrreo Jy'Jbnx*- Xanoi^jBout© iol d-aso isq 

• i^. ion eisv tnsfii^tut ijjo al iitti^LtxoqBei siolsieriT .sseoqiyq 

-i0j- 3rf.+ sv^ri oi- io*«Xsi srft/lo *ff^ii edi tAaleb o^ ts&troAttss 

Jo ebttu'i stij lo iuo btsq -toorfoa rigiil fci£« t^ noa eirf io noxt 

X^noidxcj-xs iol i^alvsX trrifom^ 8ri:t sou salJbiviij Y^f toiiteib exit 

srfd- Xi£ seeoiuq letl^o ot ed-fiiqoi -qa mi oi bm oe .essoqiuq 

-?• Xoorfoe 6di ,i9vos'ioM ,a3«ccii;q X^noitjccx/Jbd io^ i^eXvaX mat 

- lo Bsii^-'Ijee Bdi tjerf'^r ?oflBVi;a nl ?.'on3f ton bluoo aioto^iii; 

, loo -; ©riT »ft£SY gnlueit© eil.^ iol scf LXi/ow aieriojsscf "erf* 

^Jio> "io Xoorfoe n'^lrf fcL^s x^ ^'^lS^'^^^^''^ot$.lvt sxf? J-isrl".' ej^w 

-rTl«n lo i-soc jai'iqije i*q sxt"* Jbsaoye foa tit 4&9^ isq eijeXloJb 

tnatnYsq t£rii/bbisoit,rxt looiq srCT Xoorfoe rfgirfv Jbi/ia gninl^J 

arit *A rf'JBfW' pas , Xoorfoe d-gtd ktr^? ^d" Jb^iiucsi b^V eon^vfc^ ni 

Ltjp.s n/1 asw JbXlilo bljee ae^o airfcf "io snXtCjesrf 9rf:f lo aail;^ 

Yne d-a ii(>X:ac!*e ecT'o* 9L<S&hL brts. ooxusisxli/e ^cf XocVfoe rfglrf 



! tiri'.s lor non paymsnt of sai.i tuition. TViS juigri:::nt only 
j rs'.; aired ize.yrr.Qv.t /or the currant year. An ?vct filed in the 
I office of t:.5 seoretary of 3t-.ts on July £, 1915, neither 
aignod ncr vetoed toy f.:.3 £:ov2rncr, r^psal.g O'aid aot of 1S13, 
r.nd aubisti tutes ^-revisions sc.T.e-viiat iifferent thsrsfor, but 
that act do? 3 not affect tr.e juigmsnt of ths court b=lc'.v 
in this ca^e * 

Te find no ::rror in the ^udg.T.ent ar;.d it is ther^ifors 
afiirir.sd* 



tl«6 tnssEStjJt sn'T .noiiliit iitJ^v^o tfosm^^q nan io7 t:iilt \ 
• «9rf*len .arex .a tIwI. no e*.-:!? ^o .ic:t^l?aoas siit^ ©oi-ilo ; 
Jjj-<? .Tc^eiffft <^KSi&i2J:i) tailrsmoe ecoxeivptc.as^yJi^ecfwaJ'aj^ 

.-•. I. ;.-X -!;.'-■?' ic"' -If ill?:. "C-i.. /fi^aT&c /^l.^ -. liU'.oitzcutB ic 

■ ^ i^i. &6!iO"^.. '-i '.ii^-rf^o o:^ ^.triT,'0'j 0^ as! oS fij 

■ c> saxtf-^^'S ;'' ' .JjatVt- W'oa'v-.'j*.' i: no.u .'-.i i-XiJ' 

ICC ; '.' '' .:t.«7,". ■ * "S-jiscf tXiiow 

^r , ^ ■ :• i^rv^'^': i.;i i.; , 1, ■ ■„■; ■ 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, |_ 

SECOND DISTRICT. ( ''^' I, CHRISTOPHER C DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing- is a true cop}- of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



■'.■1i'lt>i):d biUii .r-.iuoiin' lo oh. 

a<->iffi<jM 9£lf 'to vqou Bwrt a «i •j^aiogo'io't. 'jff.t 'li-di y^i 
.eoifio Yin iti f- 






AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice/ 

Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice^: p, f^l T A^ 2 5 8 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerl?.^ 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. / 



\ / 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
trH :. 4 :3iri the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ures 
following-, to-wit: 






/ycr 



^ 



[T A T., 



:a - '.Jn .•:■-■ ..j:tMi enii. .-'1..1, .. . .■ ■■; 1. ■" 

^nillT lo ei!ii2 !idi to ivi'r.i?.!':! trio--. ■■.: -r-, 
.ooilaxiL -gaibiaaiT ,8UAH31K ,M i«IC ' 



.K :;! ^ 



no : :) ■ V^-O-l f 8-" 
59 III BSVf tlJJOO ?5ri.l tc- 
3 SID'S xl cn^ eL'iow odJ- ^ 



Gon, IIo, 6175. 



Joseph w.IIaple, Admr, , etc. 



-VG- 

Stephen G-.Lawlnin, 



) 

Appollec , ) 



) 

) 

Appellant. ) 



Appeal from Icoria, 



l^.| /C^' 



r/ 



br,ox3eerlin'?/1,uiio,Qr section e-rsbt2r~©ae of. 



DIB3TiL. P.J. ^^ 

the Acijnini strati on Act, a^jm xi hy Jose^ih, F.LIaple, as adr.inis- . 
trator of tlao estato of Ilargaret M.Heranerly, deceased; against 
Stephen G-, laivhun, -g9^i7ltoi3. 4tt^tn' order against respondent in 
tha-^^^^olt-pt e coi.ir - t -o f ^ "'o- o y^be— ge^ftatyr-ftjad-;- on ]i.is a-o-oeal to the 
circuit court'^and a trial there de novo, ia-^ 



'1 



r ■'. •■-•<.- 



T;: 



o,g a-iuc' u l i lm, \ 7 libi ' u'b^ I 'tj- t^ i oon^a t-sgaB-g-eKffiire-d , to turn over to 
the administrator a certain fund of L;4000, derived from t"io sale 
of certain papers-, Js^^SaTi -acillad--.tli&. JI&2ahar4--s^curi-t^les, \-:dt]-j. 
certain interest charges thereon^ and a certain note, executed 
hy David Slaman, for 06,395, and a inortgagi^ securing the same, 
and certain interest char?Tes in connection therev/ith. V -^Si€^-€s^ 

|TMr"ig112S2P??ea^"respbnd:eiT^^ 

rodrimH; U i aL th^irra- 
ires'ir~are corrGcl;"Tf The" order is" 



Jiot he Imre atatarL^ ng 
visiQns_iif -tha- ^s'de^r-^is- iro~ 1 
correct 



to the o4000 fimii^.aiid^«^-t^ -fch^ SlaE^ 

-tnort-5a^-T7Bi^-"lJ2r''s:gi'mrn[e!^'"^ ii- 1 .ird. party 

to await the final rocuXt o.f.-tiii£^.suit,..,a%d t^^s the amount 



-1- 



,5VXa -.oil •neO 



,',«^#9 ,«'£liiBA ,0lC[^Uli7 ilqeeoTi 



{ 



,iiifx£wBU.,,iD irorrcorf-' 



( » d-xiBlIocifiA 



<iJ>rij. 






.1,5 .jLlEalC 



. ..;.I.CS'S -ti^e^i-esoQl) ,\7;I'£©i3iK©H,M *a^gT£ill ±p ©c)-a^a9 arfiJ-'lo lod-xrr* 

/^ A- 

J; .. ... .; •. -T . J.5- --^ >"- -^ wu-«r ^^.,.^ L 

od- 19V0 niifd- dd- . b&£±fn>e'S'a&'^-~^^tioq:B«rf^\,ilB'£ orh ' T ,flriff - oQiiJcg^ ^j'. 
oLsa oiiJ- moil lioviioJj «000-l-J|jJ lo f>rtw± nlv^.d-ieo .9 ^tod-cid-aixilniljii exid- 

fDstiroojvO ^ochaxi ni^sd-ieo Ms ^nooiari^h ao^'XSflo ^bqiq^hI ais&'XQo 

,9fiT'5£3 oxf* gjairxirooG a7^J3sd"S0(ji b Sao ,565,00 to'! ,rtsraxjia JJiv^d -^scT 

— «~<«ffi-^ .jidiiwtTxorUt- nojtij-osxiao.o kl a©T',t£j3rIo *aeiotei rcled-tcoo Bos 

.f"i©£'xo "ox{d-''5r"iFooTioo""srr6~Jfao'.^^ ' 

^ / ■ \ 1 

-x- 



lYenelin ITGLT-iGrly and "Ig wife» luaxgaret, ovmed a business 

building on Adaras street in tlis city of iooria, sjid lived in tlie 

upper story tliereof, and omied otnor property, Ee dicd'm March 

1, 1912, aged seventy-nine years, and she died on Juno 50, 1915, 

arjGd about seTrenty-seven years, TTl icthor the - ti t le t o Lire 

roal-smd-ieesfstmai proper L^ 'T7c:Tr-lih-M!3-or~±ir-iier^-ie--lflsafH=o-rial- ■ 

cse ■it±::t^-£an^^^^'!EBrt^(©ef ore 'lis death he had vested the title 

to all Jiis property in ;iis v/i e so tliat she became the ov/ner 

thereof. 2hey lived in tlie second story of said Adams streot 

property for sor.ie tuenty-five years, Choir heirs at lav; rrere 

four named dau^cnters and ''ilie. children of tr;o other daughters 

then deceased. .'^n^illaaat-^* .the husband of one of said living 

daughters, and at the tines hc:-e|in cro.o tion ho lived uith his 

family at Gil Prye Avenue, I.Jps, Hert-erly oirned a lot next to 

a^p^feilirrrts knovm as G09 Pryo AVenuo, ffiie ^derTmerlys decided 

to cease 1 vin.j over the store, and a dwelling house v/as built 

for tSiem at G09 Prye Avenue, Th^ construction thereof was beVvin 

in July, and finislaod in October, 1,909, and the Hem:nerlys oe- 

\ 
cu-oiod it. As the Hem:nerlys becameV old and feeble, their 

* ■ ■ \ 

uon^rriod daughter, ?Ta.rtlia, ~;ho then kade her home with her 

pr.-r»g.yTfc! ^ p^«a^ T-4---T7ii» . . mMtT^m^^Lgyr:rnH n>^r^Y^£^->>i^^ COllOCtC thO rCntS 



under a power of attorney. Under the i"ier suasions of g e poll ant 



t]ip.t. loower of attorney was revoked and from tliat time on &? 



j»€ llant .coll-cted th rents and attended t«^ a,ll the business 
I affairs of ir, and J'rs.Hemmerly, His eonte;iition concerning the 



\ f I 04OOO is- that it was proposed for a long time, culminating perhaps 
-/- in the spring of 1908, that h.c should build a houce for t.em on 



-2- 



aseMtBSsd g J5sxrwo jd-o-i-sgXQH ^elJtw axrf btiB •'^ociaeH ixlXexio?/ 

:{oT^H xf^-^&olo eH .Tjd'rcsqo'^jq: iorf;J-o X>e.cr5TO Ma .loarorijJ- -^odis rcoorqir 
^'CIQL «02 Qxorl no I^el5 ©iIq Jor«3 ,axG9'^ ©££±XI•''^c^fiOToa J&esa ^SXSI ,1 

•ronwo Grid- acaeood oils jfadd' oa s.r.xw aM nl ■^^•seqo'xg ajtx.t lis oct- 
tsQitQ aciJsM I)JtB3 3:© ij^od-e Mcpos erid- jaJt .5evII TSsi^^J , »%ooiqs1& 

•^tvlL M^a 1:0 aap io toficTs^iI e&^[^s>4~'^^s£sli^mf.. ..JiessooeS xceii*^ 
. ■ ■ , ' '. ' ,' v.- - ., '^'^ 

aid xtMw fieviX orrnoid-.Toiri) niie^cafi aoiEJ;,^- axld" djs^ae ,^T:ed-jiJt8jmf> 

od- ±JC9ii d-oX s IjoinTO -gXrrafnraoH ♦8*3^ «i9*rxiOYA .©'^l? XXa d-a yXxfliet 

fieJoJtosI) a'^ionmraH exOT * •euxia^^ o'^C.epa 3£ tfv;oiaI bo -d 

■' ■ ■ • , ' / ' " ' , 

tXlxrrf Bsv: Sfflarorj: ^;riiXX9wJ5 js 5xii ,9iod-a ©iiyJ- lavo galv I. ©cx^oo od- 

,r>-:gocf 8J3W loo^sfid- npitoind-afioo ^^cTT ,,.,ejya3T4\©^l gPS !>•«, cioxS}- lol 

-00 a-^XiectmoH orfc)- J&na teo&i: ..•xocfod'oO ftt ^sSBl&llLJi^& ^-^XsiJt t£k 

liorW ,oXd"ee^ Ms i5Xo /4maoocf s\;J[isxim9H add- aA .d^Jt holqao 

8*xi©i ■diJ3' '^d;fo'oXXoo ,-^^&ft£ic3fe£te-- ■ ,S ", , ^steercsq 

-«t3 jio onild- oJsriJ- noi% brm boilovoi 8£?t ij^mo*^ lo wv/o^. 

eifd- aaJtirreojBoo no id-i^d-no o alH ,-\tX:f&nDaoH*axw brsB m'xll lo aiXalis 
Xiro j^fsa'd- srtoX a. lot li.QBoqo^ir c ■.rid--«4 OOOi^f-; 

^^jxoj^f JB blJtsTQ J)XjT0£la 0xf ^GiU ^QQiQl lo •Qai'sq.B ©rid- Jijt 



[ t'lis vacant lot, similar to ]iiG own lionse, and Glioiild pay 'for 
it, and tna Trlien they diod lie slioalc! liave the hoiioe and lot, 
lie c lairaiS^mat from July to October, 1909, he did huild ViIb 

( house 6t a cost of {>4,000, end paid for it hin^elf , and t lat 

I afterwards and after the store property hrd heen sold, he aslDsd 
iTrs.Hemriierily to pay back to hin T/hit he had expended for the 

. house, and tliat she authorized him to take i';4000 of hor Deiihart 
securities in payment for the cont of the house, and ti.at hq did 

\ so possess himself of r.aid securities, and afterwards r s-liaed 

the cash upon them, and t"iat he thus h-.came the lar.diul ovxvss 

\ 
of said •,;4000 in satisfaction of a like sum v/hich he had paid f or_ 

■^her. After tlie -icin:orlys Iiad inoYod to Prye Avenue a r irodll a nt 

negotiated for them, in part throu,3h an agent, a sale of the 

Adans street property for (5S5000 to David Slaman, She sale was 

consummated on October 30, 1911, Tiio consic'eration was paid as 

follows: T'le purcliaser assuiod a A5500 mortgage upon said 

premises; he turned over to the Hermerlys mortgage securities 

to the principal sum of Ol<^»000» wMch he had ohtained from 

t3ie Denhart hank at V;ashin--ton, Illinois; he gave a note to 

ITrs.Hemmerly for 06t395, and secured the '^ss\e hy a second mortjage 

on the premises; :md ho transferred, to thorn three certificates 

of deposit issaed by the Commercial German llations.1 Banls: of 

Peoria, aggregating i'p332. Those sums amount to 024,227, The 

balance rpjeari^to have been paid by some o-coruod intorest on the 

Denhart securities, loss accrued interest owin,g on the §3,500 

nortrgago assumed, and porhaios some corir.iissions paid some one for 

conducting the sale, and possibly some cash. A tin bo2r was 

obtained and these securities were placed therein, and -"rs, . 

Hemr.ierly oelivered the box to respondent to be placed in the 



»^oS J&ixe BGLTod Qd& eY&ri .ftluoiCa eri belb x^d& JserfvT sxld- Brss ,d-Jt 

alrid- MljTcr fiI6 ed ,6061 ,i©dod-oO o* ^^JJjTi mcrrl d-cxfi imisfo eH 

^a.'id- iiafi .lleeffljtxi &1 to! Maq Jono jOOO^§ ^o 5-800 e tA eetrod 

d"xafino(I i8x£ Iq OOOJS'n; esTsd- od" mid JiasiTontoB r " ^- '■ 5xts ,©nxroif . 
bib ed :i£iil& b£LB ^eairoxL od^ I'O tsoo erfd- ^ol d-nt^i.; ; .o ^ asl^lTCToe" 
JjasilBi-i s5"S£^in:©cMe .506 ,aeid-±Tira9B bias lo ileaciM sadBBoq oa 

asuxvo I«5:.7sl oxft emsoorf Biid& Qd &Bd& bae ^ajBiid- noqss d&ao 0d& 

- •■ .■'■■.. - ' . -■( -.:■ „ . .. I 

'■'■■•": "■'--■ -" dcldv: assB eiiJtl a lo iioltos±8Jt*SB stl COOK F,^o^^« 

ed^ io-.^Ijs^. s ,t093,B. as i^iroTild -u. ._ ..u ,i^...-. ibl ge-^- » -^v,- , 

3i5w aCfiS atfjKtl .xisinaCS blYsd ot OOOQSc) rcol Tpfiogorq d'oo'^i.- ... 

asBleq: bdw aoxd-eieManoo exIT ,11^1 ,05 locfod-oO r^'^ rv^-?.,.-,,^,^,^^ 

£jfcee xtoqi; oss^d^om 0035i| & J&erairaaxs TsaMorruc v. _ ;^..cIIox 

as^Jtiifosa ogssd^OM a-^IrrornmoH 9x£* od- ^evo fienxtrd- ed ;aoBJ:f7i9TCi; 

. iaortl Jjeajtsd-cfo iaci Qd &oidvf ,000,i&I§ lo mira Xaqiortlict eif* od- 

od- ©d'ois s ©TB3 9x1 ;alojalIII ,iiod-:§cixrIaJ3?/ d"B irLsd drteilccsCt ©/d 

egjB5d"K)fii Joiiop^a a -^jd" errtsa siid" Beijjooa ^3a£! ,385,3^ nol TjI'rsinrireH.atc'-' 

-.. stosS XoaoxJ-cn nsi.:..,., ... ...^ ... ...■■.■ ... ^,.. ..........i tiBoqpb J:o 

odt. •Vaa.,^1 od- d-iUTQns srairs onoxIT .SSSf gnld-ssoi^gs ,B±tcoe1 

nrfd ao d-a.o'^ed'xil fjoincoojB onioa "^cf J5J:sb[ ii9ocf otM od^iB- ■>'■ '■^'^" 

003, G| 9.iid' no ^iwo d-aeiodxtl l)o£n:ooJ8 aa©! jasld-lrsx.,. . ^j. ,^.. 

'.;r.T oxtn ©doa bt&q. axiQlaaJtrnnoo omoa agMioq Bcc .fidnuj^-^ -^-. - •»-rn 

3podf Hid- A «daBo ©croa "^cfi^aoq J6cc ,olBa ©rL -__..„.., 

.a*t"^ Mj3 jnloioxld- ^ooclq ©'xsw iQld-lrtxroea ©oexid" Bnje BoxilJ3d"d"o 

odu lil beoBlc: sd od- iaQlftiOc^a-. oi xocT oird- bo-j:ovlIc'> T:Xi:c,"rion 



safety roxtlt of tlio Ilercliants IJational Bank for safe keepiixg for lior. 
She iiad a key to dqIcI tox. Eg placed the Tdos: in t lie vault of tlie 
bank, Cliore ==^ no proof that she over afterTrards had access to that 
box. She was not T7ith him xtiQii he placed it there. Ho had no in- 
fonnation that she ever went to thr.t box after he placed it in the 
baair, Che trial in the -robate eonrt was soao ei.^hteen months oefore 

-3 trial in the circiiit court, and during all -olaat tine he mast have ' 
kaown it was important for ]iin to ascertain if any officer or employee 
of tho bank had ever seen rrs.Hermnerly go to that bos:. He produced 
no oroof on that subject. She pp.Ye the key to him at his request 

enevor there was any ousiness of hers to bo transacted in connection 
v,-lth the conti^ntn of the bo:-?:, sudi as colloctinp: int root on the se- 
curities. Appeiia»t claimsthat near tho end of her life, --rs. 
Hcnmerly brought hira the Slaraan note for §6.395. and the mortgage, and 
gave them to him as compensation for all he had ever done for her and 

t he thereby became the lawful o^imer of said note and mortgage. 
He had pr::viously testified in a way that implied that all tho securities 
for '.: ich the AdQ.ms str- et property was sold wore placed in the tin box 
and taken by him to the banlr and deposited in its safety vault, and that 
he did not remember taking anything; out iCor her except interest coupons. 
Boin'-cj^^ confronted w;lth the inquiry where she got the (56,395 Slaman 
note and mortgage to give to liim, his only esiplanation was that ]Troba3:ly 

;■ did not put those securities in tho tin bo::-. It further appeared 

I that lie h-ad never ch:.rged the Hemmcrlys anytliing for his services, not 

i 

j ho.d he intended to do so, nor load they ever before offered to ^-..j him 

i anything. He did not c" ow services of any cuch value. He testified 

he had had frequent settlements with Hi's. Homme rly before that time, at 

which times she would naturally liave paid him if she had owed iiin for 

services. In tlic latter part of her life and when she was ill, her 

u[jhters, other than Ill's, LaxThun, cane to their rother and tried to 

-4- 



oif* lo d-IxrsT sri^ «1 xotf ©ill isoslq eH *xocf £>tB^ o& y,^"^ ^ ''sji sdl 

■j&d^ od- aaeoos .&£xl aSms^iQ&ts x&m &dQ ifadif loorq .zlnsc 

-jcti ox£ 5Gr{ oH ^o^erld- ■ ^1 ioosXq; eiJ xiexfef cilxf iJitli!? to: •:toc 

erf* Kl d-J:'§9o>BXq ©rl 'r9d-!bB acod d-^d- ocT tosw Teve ©xla texlu nold-sfirio! 

ov/srC cfsxnu sif saald- d-BxSt Us ^JhLKrB ijiss ^d-iuoo cMijo-x. -~i .teliJ- erf; 

©«>joIqffl© 10 ttoolllo Tsns 1:Jt nl^sd-ieoas ot (glxl toI d-xisdrcoc ti nvroic 

JBsoufiortq oH * »xocf ^hcajf od- 03 ■^IiS!raraoH»8'3i'.I neea *x cf crid- 1( 

i'.'56irp0^ ali!' d-B mM od^ ^9:^: eild' ev£^ oxI8 •d-oetcfus d xooicr oi 

isoJtd'osimoo Hi bB&o£masr£^ 06 bd" artoxf lo BGanlaircf "^gcLs sbtt stcoxld lovsnedi 
xro d'80'Xf'd'iil ^Hld-ooIIoo ee iJoira tsrooT eiid" ±0 .ad'nateoo eild- rfd-Jh 
.aor^ ,6111 iQsi ^0 J&xi© erld' TiJaoxx d-sjdBraxal:Slo 4y:- .^^oid-iTrr: 

i)iif3 ,esosi"ioci 0xi^ Me i5€5«&| ttol ed-cua rtatiiBXa oxicf mill d-ilsu"orrcr •^lemnio] 
Bos iQd 10'x onoJB -rave fkBd ed 11a "xol nold-.G3jn:Gqflioo C3w?> oilxl ot raoild- ovs^ 
.-T^x^ijd-iora bnsi od-on ijl-oa lo Tioa-wo ' JD/iiSBl od& ecwsoocr -^o'oiorD)- ori d-jsrf; 
aold-iiiro98 eifd- lis d-sxld- fieilqcil dxxid- "^sw e nJ: ^sIlJtd-Bed- -^iaD-olTciq bsd 9] 
xocT xtid- ori& ni 5Bo&lq s-igw Moa bbv? -^laqorsq diB-id-s aniJsBA arid- dol vr to': 
d-srid- Aixo ^d-XJxsT x^e^ca a&l ni £o;f±3og:oi) fins ijBBd odd od- mixi -^cT xie3l.cd £ 
•enorrjjoo d-sstodni d-qeoxe tod nol iiro gciild-ijns §ii±^d" -r. d-on fixf) oi 

njaatfiXS 96S«9§ er£d d-o^ ©Jia oTsifw x^ta^ai aM d&xvr fednotiliioo ^»WfeS^ie( 
.Icfecforsj d^Md asw aol&sa&lcpc: M ^nijcrl od" ©vxs Od" ©s£3d"ionr J&ns ed'oi 

J&©'rs9fq[s laxitrcul d-I .xocT nld ©rfd- aX Bel^itssoe : i/.t don J&±Jj e 

ice ^neoivnae aid rol gxIllfi^■^yts tf^XiontBsH ©iid fie ©ri dr 

Eiixl )jixj od" f)©Tollo ©-xoisd ♦fG-TO '|i>ild' J5Bri ion ,oa ofi od- JboMedril exi I 
Boiliid'aed oil .exrljsv riox/a '^jos 3:o aoolvioa wo 3 don bi? .ifiiridx; 

d's.omld- d-criv ■^IioCTnoH.ewM xld-i d bGd 

lo^t airl bQVJO b£id exfa 11 mjtxl blaz ©vsri '^Il^xrd-xja filxrovr oxla aenrij- xfolr'i 
xoif J III a£(w oxTa xcexlii? itxis ©11 jxld cI ,a9ol\'noi 

.0 TODxId'Ofr; nleiid od orijo ,xiirxIWBj:,8lI:l xtsxCd- lor'Co .aTCod 



\y 



>^^ 



ascertain xvliat Iiad bccorio of tlie -I'ocee.^of tlio salo of the 
Adams street property, biit aainallF.iU Iiad acquired sticIi an in- 
fluence over lier tliat she resented tlieir inquiries, and some es- 
trangement resulted. After her death the adrninistrator opened 
the box and found that about All, 000 o:; tiio v-rococds of the ale 
of the Adams street property }md disappeared, and as Lawhun was 
the only ono who had ]iad access to the bo:^' or. had transacted, her 
business, the adnunistrator filed this petition ap;r-inst lawhun in 
order to ascertain r/hore that jB.Tt of tlie estate had cone to, 

A pp oi a iapt urgue^tliat the possesnion of ;ersonc^l projperty 
^ iiroof of ti^le, ond that as he hc^. t)ossession of tMs n4000 
fund and of t-is Slaman note and nortgc{^*e before : jrs.IIenunerly 
died, his title thereto ±s, ttiereby established, and that the 
case GO made has not been overcomo. Ee-S- tat e sgy . 4 ;1> q— ^^-enral-gula- 
-^1 correctly, but in our pinioia/that is :-o the l^sr Tzherc the re- 
spondent v/as the coii^id -nt^al agent of the O'lTner of tlio property, 
■with lav-rfal access thcr^o/and abundo^it opportunity to transfer 
it to his OTrn poscession ^thout the Imov/ledge of t^io ornier, but 
tliat in such easo the a^6nt mu) turns up vrith tlic property in his 
possession after the dcVath of tnbs^ovrnor through whom he had con- 
fidential access to the property, -wit^ the ability to got it 
secretly into his ov^ possession, is req>^.red to assume the 
burden of establishing that ho ca-ie by such proiBrty in good faith, 
Adams. T Adans, 81 111. App, 637, and 181 111. SIO, 2he fiduciary 
relation existing between appellant and li-.a-nd li-s.Hem^iGrly, and 
between appellant and "rs.Hem^ier ;y after her htisband Sled, is 
abundantly shown in tliis evidence, as well as liis asKess at ivill 
to these securities; :md his supposed posr esciois?. doec not, in 
our o.jinion, establish a title in him tiiereto, 

-5- 

■rv 



el^' era- lo afioGooi-rr or& ^o GOO ,11^ d-jrods fBd& Sacrol Mis X6cf od* 
asw iisrrlwflJ aa J&nis ,fieise€[c![jSBl5 Jb.r.ri T5tisq:(yiq teeits arafeM srT;?- xo " 
rtoil fjod-asanBidh JoBxf.io xod edd-^od- aseooA Bsrt JBiGif orfw ©no tj.: 
ai fissdvskL d-sair)^.3 r£olo"-ioeq eirfd" Mill ttod-BrcfeinlirtBs sxld- .-"crTlsird" ' 

000^ alii d- lo noiase-z^apq Jjeti ori Bs/d^srld" Ijiio ,eIJ-ld- lo ioo-cc. _j^ 

-aJij?£-fgma^r-»ria' /g Q^ad' a .iaH .oxrrooievo xxoecf d'oii 8sr£ eB^ oo eaao j 
-or£ oild- oierlT/ -m^l Qd& ^pa al tQdi^\^ol,alq- 'ssrp ai &iidi ^-zlto&noo 

lalsnsrcd- od- T5d-linrd"iocj:g:o timlimjds &n.B\oi'^9di auooosi IjjI-^jbI xld-iv 

d-jTcT .lenwo erld lo e^oXwocc^ exid dirorid-^ noiSBS^aotj awo al/ 

aid al ■\5d-isq:oiq Slid" dAlMf xiw aaxi/d' oxJ^ d^xi^s ed^ea&o xLaira xti; d-*iilj- 
• - • ' ' y > 

-jttoo £ex£ srl aiodn d-guo-idA toaw) y^df '3x) d&0oli eild' ^9^jb xioieGsaaoq 

d-l d-og od- ijd-IIlcfc oxio rt^lw ,T5ti©c[0'3!a dift od" "asoooe Ls^lisiebil 

.axfd- ecijsraac od J5ei4«TjJ9i si ,nolaBo3aoq xkto aid odisi \jId-e"a:ooa • 

•rtd-lal .5003 xtl icd-raE[OTa jkoua %d c J-stId" 3aiEl8lI(rsd;3 9 lo nsJiijro' 

TX.^loxfBl'i on'T •OIS •III 181 bsxi^ ,VCiw .qqA •IH\IS «3"^r^A T.acrsM 

joiXB ,T5li9ram9H,atL{ X/^^tS.! fina drfsllsqq.'i jBoewd'ecf ^.xxidexxa uoid-ale^ 

al ,i>9ll bazdossd r&d lod^is ^.'3Cf>frrafi|H.a'tU M^ .d-ijuolloc.qjs loewd-orf 

IXIV7 &!z caaaaB aiil ae XXflW as ^p^ioblro gldd itt moda ^Id-fujrjxiirciis 

xil ^doxi s©ox> ^oloa9r;3oq BaaoqqxfB alrl bm:, jaoid-ittuooa osoxld p& 

.odottou'd- fiilri: nl oXdW fi ilalXcTcd-ao ,colnlf.o -iJ/o 



^^hciL-'^^L^- 






Appoll ft j rb h.acl for niaiiy jcars wor.rod for an electric li'_^ t 
company at }?eoria at 07O per nontli, or ;'i840 i)er r-oar, Ilo 1b d a 
family to sup ort. He recelTed so^g rentals from certain real 
estate In "-'eoria, "but lie owed largo suns socured t'.iereon and had 
interest charges to pay, as v/ell as repairs, instirancc and taxes. 
By a will of '-is :aother» vrlaich load never Tjeen adinitted to probate, 
he claimed to 07,m a farm in Zontucky, r/jiich he had iio^fceen lor 
twenty- five years, hut from \7l.\ich lie roceired OlOO rent per year. 
By the sanie ttIH ho claimed to Iiave x'eceived five shares of ctoc!^ 
in a certain loan association in Indianapolis aiid that he Real- 
ised somet -in.^ thorefi'oni. At first ho testlfiedtliat he had 
received some O^OOO therefrom over twenty years 'beforo. After- 
wards his 'Memory failed, and he was una,ole to testify anything 
ahout how much he Iiad received therefrom. Eg claimed that hj 
an arrangement with liis employer ho only ',7or::ed about five liouro 
per d y and was allo-7od to talzo electrical jobs for himself on the 
outside, and tliat he did so and had done hundreds of such jobs, 
and thought lie might liave nade ;)1000 per year thereby, I^lzen 
pressed to name t>.ose hundreds of jobs he v/as able to name but a 
very few of them, and he had no booliE of account by which he coi^ld 
show any of t>.em, ^, 2he superintendent of his employer testified 
that 5ir¥»j7«Ti3tt%-*-»- hours of labor at tho plant were from seven a,m, 
to five thiarty p,m, except t\70-thircs of Saturday aftQxnoons, 
and t:iat ho loiev; of no arrangement by which' v>j^iallat was nermdtto d 
to take outside work on his own account, Afflpell.fT»-?; named tho fore- 
man with whom he :^:.ad this arrange -ent, ancl- the superintendent 
testified that that foreman had not worked for that company for 
fourteen years. i-t-4-a- evid o n -t— tfc:a:^-app : ?,l i n,nt_£Ll.d-:iao-t eeepribye 



y 



J *,.*. .»^o OH ..o^-.^* -'^-- .^-^ ^ "^^"^ '~^' *"°*' 

.... o... ..0.. .e..<.\r.o e. WX,«0 ... .«. ^^-^T;; 

.., „o .XO.MM .0. a<rct X.o..*oeX. o^. o. ..^XX. 3«...=. V^ -. 

o *iid emat 0* oXtfo sot sh aont j. 

.eB.*e.. .e.0X^ sM .0 ..a.no*«.«^ ... ^"^^^ T 

.... „-,o. .«. e.«.v«.x, .i* *.-^^^ - """'^rrx. 

,„;.„o.^.o,.a e. W ,..e.03«.-.^ aX.t ^. .. »o* . .. »» 
-IV.- Y*-a. . ^i_ -t +T r-Tfl^.v noe^i'XUOi 



.ZA.'^i Vit' 



7^ 



rca^esririiec soiiTgTrg'T»^kOQO-TQrtfe-??Trf::eit"-tr^^ b tt il d -T-arlcl-:^au'::e-. Ho 'acA 
a orotlier, Sannicl II.LaTTlimi, uliom lie Iiad not seen for cone tTreiity- 
i'lve yoars. Ho toctified "L;liat tills "jrotlior earao to his Iiornc 
on a visit in "iircli, 1908, and stayed a week; tliat lie told his 
brother that the lIor:icio rlys liad proposed tliat Iio build a house j'or 
then on thoir adjacent lot as good as his houKo, aixL they r/oald 
give him tho hou; o ciid lot c.t tlieir death; that the hoiise v;ould 
cost O-OOO. G,nd he needed -aoney xrith ^;;uich to Luild it; that on 
ITarch 10, 1908, duriir,: said visit, his Drother took from his 
pocliet OSQOO in "oills of the denomination of five, ten anS. trrenty 
dollars, and loaned it to him, and that he gave 'his orothor a 
pronis ory note therefor, payahlo in fice years uith interest 
a,t five per cent per annum, p7:ya"ble annually. Ho did not deposit 
said Toney in a";ay hank, although '-le was accustoned to carry a 
deposit in a hank. He testified that he had in his collar a 
sheet iron receptacle for the safekeeping of none^ and .r-j^Q^s, 
fastened ^itli a padlock, and that :.-e placed said ySSOO in that 
receptacle. The contract for the ■lOusc ;7as not -.ade till one 
year and three months thoreaftor, r^.nd. he x?. s paying interest on 
various debts, yet he kept this oney in that hiding place withoiit 
omy investiTient all thi).t time. He testified thtt he built thet 
house mostly T/ith this nonoy, though he drev/ some snail checks 
therefor on a small checking; account ■v:^iich he kept in a banir, 
and tha said small checking account only contained about jjSOO 
at a time; and that he :aGid (-4000 for the ho-aso, S. i:. Lawhun 

testified that he lelt his Zentuclry home tihen he v/ss leso than 
ten years old and liad ever pince shifted for himself; that he l'-€d. 
been in every city in the United States; that he oecaKe a 
photographer; that he v;oiad go to a tovTn and establish a gallery 
and ran it t-;70 or three raonthr.- or trjo or three years and sell ,out 



\ 



- oinoxf aJtxi of Qtssio 'iQil&oid olxiit d-arf^f ,iJ9l^i*a,©i; -oH., r »8PU3o-^ avil 
I alff 5rdd- drr d-istfd- jiiioew b ^©-^ed-a fins ^80eX ^jdo^ifi' ffi tJtaJbv s no 

i)Xjj"0?r tsrf^ "&S-6 'josxroxi 3±ri ac £003 m fol '^n&oBtha tciexfd- no mortd- 

ir.^-:' blsjcm oe.rrbif ekdh S-firfd- idd-BoB ilorfd-^d-c ^oX £w, ©Eiifoii odJ- mJtrf svlg 

• ' no stBrft ;ol\&liffd" od" doirfw A&lw t^ji^ci ,£^j5ooa .Oif Jois^ ,000:^^ *aoo 

:.;:•.."•• " Bid mO'ft ^lood- larfd-oxcf ajtxi ,d'lai:v .fiiea ^.fcDJiJ ^8061 ,01 fioiBM. 

'4,0'y^&!iem& MA tt6& , evil 5:0 noxd-4in:Jtinoii0J5 ^si&^^^o alljLtf itt 0082$ ttmlooq 

-X': ■ « •rorfd' oTTd" "Qlrl ov^ 9x1 &sd& fins .niijl ad" d;J^ ,&qxlboX -&i3i6 ..srxcIXoI) 

• &e&r&&ai: d!^l\i Qieaz soil fsi aXcTs^xw; ,io3;e.g:9.El* ^iJ"on xio uimoiq 

&taoqe.b d-OK J51J5 eE •TsXIasTiiiss atcfar^sq ,,0i&-ixc:a,"i9q d'xiap ic:; ovil d-s 

>■-« -'^'xijo oj)^ iiefiiod'axroo^ bsw erf ^j^ipxC^'Xa (iiEti.^ IP^ f^ "^©noai < .BXj3S 

'•^0 a 'rrfiXXoo alrf nX fiari -©rf di-eifd- fieilXd-aod-. eS , (,.^iae(f « nX d-Xsoqe?) 

^ETXslqjEsci Bus ■^nbin lo snXqoQSIolsa 01^ ^'Xpl jsXoisd-qiOOTsrr rtoiX d-oerla 

'Ntsifd' 'lii d08S^. Bisa beoslq &d d-arl* J&ajs ,::3:90Xij^ b xiS-Xw J5o.n:©tasl 

, ©CO ll±& ©£>Sn d-on s-gw oaJTOiI ©d* ^ol d'^aid'iioo oxfl .eXoBd-goooi 

no d-aoioJiiX ' griX-^m acrw ©i{ bns ^lo&^BQiodf ^d&aom es%du Mg iso-z 

issod&i'rr ^o&lq ^islBXrl d-jerld- ni ^onoru aXxid- d-cjei oil ^^-^ .ai-cr©^ sitoXtlsv 

d-«.ad- d-XXxrcTeri d-5jc£d- ^©X^Xd-aed- ©H tmjtt t^d llSi d'ftec-^asvnl Ttne 

-•' '- - a:io9if IX^a QsaoQ vjomb. ©xf iigiroxid' ,3j:GriOGT, aj^d" xfcfXw ^d-soxa oaxrorT 

..-a,;' ,4&ijjcf s xiX d-qoi ©xl xloXxfw d-iuxo^oc ^ctXn^ofrio IXjscta s no aolro'icGiId- 

GOSf. d'irod'jB BanXed-noo -^Xno d-xurooo£ ^nXalopxio X;X£«i3 I>Xbs , crij fine 

ruyxiwaCE •?.! . ,oaxroxI orEd- lol 000^;| ftXxjj ©rl d'UxId" Xna i©mXd- a ia 

OBxId- aeoX aaw exf'xsexlw omoxl •^oJxd'noS aXxI itXeX ©xi d-axf* J&oXiXd^od- 

fBxf "1^ ■'d'stf d- 'jlXoamX/f lol fio'd-lXxIa © t© Joati J&na £Io ai^oY nsd- 

jQ a-fjBoocT oil iGdt jaod-sd'a ^od^Xiio od& nX 'Vjd'Xo tjiovo nX noscf 

^ixoXiiv-g a xfaXXdrjd'Ee Bnxf xiwod- e od" 0?} bLvovj ed fBd& ji-cx[q.Gtrsod-oxIq: 

tiro Iloa biiB arzBo-z eo^xid- "^cb ow^f ico r;xI.-lnoni oonrfd- 10 ovTd- d-X xixrr bac 



)^ 



then go to cuiothar tOTvn and r=tart anotiicr; that in tliat Im5;;lne3;. 
ho "ono tines ma&e i^lOO por day, cometimos olOO por wook, sometimes 
OlOO por month and sornetimos he -rrorfced for his food, IIo teotixiod 
that ho had a trunk in V7hich T7a.s a private receptacle for pa;oers 
and raonoy; tJiat in Ipril, 1908, he car-e to Peoria to vieit his 
brother "tephon, irhom he had not seen since early "ioyhood, and 
"brou^jht in said trimli: a,l>out (54800 in currency; that thoujrh he liad 
v/ith him a T7if o and child and stayed a week he loft this -brunk in 
the hag.jage room of the pa,ssen2;er station at Peoria; that when 
he found his 'rot her needed :-'.oney with wileh to huild this hoiise, 
he went to the hagjrage room, opened the xrimk:, took out $3800 
carried it to the. honne, loaned it to his "brother, and took his 

^ "brother's note for five :^cars without i-ecurity therefor, Bo 

witness "but ^=;=ssd^sxiK, ?aid his or other testified iSas. to eTor seeing 

j this oney, ! %p?r»iaiT aat testified that he sent ^'-lis "brother once 
!*)190 or one year's interest, and aii other time §380 or ti;7o years' 
interest, and once he paid liimsoiae interest v/hen his "brother paid 
him a subsequent visit at "-eoria, and that t>.is -was at-ll the 
interest he paid, and that he did not ranit this Ol90 and o380 
by check or draft or express, btit that in each case he did up a 
package eonta-ininj the amount naraed in five, ton anl twenty do" lar 
bills aM sent thorn to his "i^rother by registered letter, and 
received in each ca-se a registry rc^Bceipt which sl-iowed the ejnount 
of the roiittance, thou:";h the officer "•ho issued the receipt did 
not SCO the ■ lonoy. He was una"ble to produce any such receipts, 
and he did not caU any one conn cted 'rf.th Llie Post Office to show 
that any such registered niail was ever nent, S, II, LaT^hun^ testi- 
fied that o380 was once sent to him oy ail by^?p-'.?lli:int as in- 
terest, but that he never had to sign any receipt when he received 
it, and that the rest of the interest was remittod in stuns of five, 
ten and twenty dollars at a. time "oj r-iaal, and tr.at he had received 

-0- 



^ 



■snaaJtsjTd' drxtt- at &Gd& ;iod&oi:G ^la&p. Las xisro* lodtooB o^ os aed& 

36ial;)-fflr:08 .-^oott- isg[ OOJTf SGicld-ociOG ^^b/j t:oc[ OOlf eSjsra 89ErJtd-oi.;o oii 

fid2i^d-«©d- aH «f>6«5: sM lol iJor-TioW eii 'aeald-acios Ms dd-«orr -rfq; 001$ 

q^- ■ ?^i:s±v ot filioe^ ot orcist) oil" ,80ex ,XlicfA Hi &3d& ;-"-prro«^ Mb 
fifia ^AooiE^oc/ x^^^ ©oifie i![©9?i d'onScir brJ oioriw ,floff<70 oirf 

Serf 8ri dgxrorld- d-vOd!;*' J^onefrxuo ni OOS-vf toocfa 2ljurac!- 1)1. ./_- 

rti sDnrssJ- eixf^J- jIcX eil ileew s Aotj.3j)-3 fitsB filixlo Jjits ellw s ciirf riojhv 

jsar/oil aixfd" bltad oJ- if9i:;"s7 rfd-l^,T -^irorri BeJbaen rtsild-ch: ;f siri jjrcijol ad 
008?5| d-iro jIoocJ* ,2£fliri# ©rfd- i»9fto<io ,inoofx egB^^^ficf ' 9rf.t o^^ drrovr eif 
elrf 2lood- Jtois ^•refS'dicf 8lx[ ocr cM JBainsoI ,8Sj :M ^5©±TICo 

oH *xol3'rfijSt Tgtixrjoe-? rfxrorrttw srsce^v^evjfl lol ed-oir a^ieifd:' . 

'atcss'y!; 0^ 10 08^J^. &sl& led'&iins fins ^t^oie^at Q^taox Q^o ro OGIv 

Jbiaj 'iedd-oTxf aiil hoxJt; is&i^i^al ocroaciJb:! Mbo; oxf'soao ixia ^dBeiotol 

. .• 9ifi- ilix 3.0W si rid- i-&d& Bft.5 ,b1io0\! d-JB* d*l3lv drioxrpescrira o CLtd 

.08S$ biw 0€X# Bixfi- d-Jtrast fort MB ^xT ^^rtd" fins .Bifiq; e. onl 

a qji J&Jfc^ Bd 03S0 jIojs© nI d-arfif- d'irdf ,'88010x9 10 dMbsifi 10 ioaxfo "^cT 

MiX^o^ •5*c;©\7d' Jtos.isod- ,9^x1: al Bsiruin tniroicB arid" sffliiJcJsdTfOo esBsIaoq 

£ae ^I'ad-j-aX Ba-xed-sigai -^sdi laifd-of".' 8M od" marid- c "id" 

d-nuocis ©xld- fiewon's ifoliSw' d-<yl9oei ^1*31501 b a^.to ifoBs ill Jbavjtaooi 

l»il>, d-qJfcooai erfd- fiowGal oiSw laoJt^o oxicf i£3ff6i0' '.aoxifid-d-i: lo 

,-id-qloooi doiTB '^5ao ©airJjoiq od" eXdJSmr asw ©H oa d-oxx 

r-cdsi P^ eai:^10 d-Gol aifJ iCd^lw Bed-orxmoD axto -^a XIxio 3 

-Id-eed^, xarxIwBj; .M -.8 ♦d'xi©G"-ove asw XIjsdi ioiad-aJt^e-s: xfoiro -^ 



>-.,.c.K^^. 



--Jj-; 



ovlooa-i Qxi Jisjiw d-qiaoai y'aa res la od" J^i- 'xevon oxi :d ,d'ooi :' 

assara ai Li-^^lmet acvr tQaiad-xil oxld- ^o i,- ,cM 

oVlooe-jc J5aif ©fl d-isxfd- SUb ,XlXi-.i ^rcT ami* & d-xj qisXXoJo ■^d-xiawd- Bx:X5 itod- 



X ■ 

/ 

over fifty i-onittanpes of interest loy nail f ron , ^iirioIlc-Ht , The 

sum in 5ija«eis=»«fe-Le iron box grer; the longer he was ciuestlonod 

i 
about it. At first he stated that there xras some other oney ±i 

the iron box, and that v/heh. this -"'5800 \7as put in that made about 
(54500 in the iron box. Before he uas throu2;h tostif^ring he h:.d 
stated that when the (|53800 xras placed in the bo^si it rt^.do the total 
therein about ;7800. He did not explain the ehaaigc in hin be ti- 
nony from 53800 to (;4500, nor from §4500 to A7800, nor did he sharr 
any source from vrlch hecould have obtained this extra 04000, 
Hone of this money in the box v/as ever reported to the assessor, 
L t - ir; poDOible LhaL Ihlid uvldu.uce Is L r u ^« l. !cn 3iav o — hiHPr4oa.-4.as.ga. 
sums f money- tindr-lmT^"^fansrarf^e^ '^ss. 

7 ion y .3:y 2he narrative, hovyever,. ■-4»-'-exc"ei5lil11gry~'l!^ro^^ • 
Ofevi«««*y»««*»*t ^7as notN^elicved by^ho :crobate jiidge nor 'iij the 
circuit .nidge, ffiioy sawNHiese-^'^w-itnesses and observed tlieir de- 
meanor on the v;itnoss staixIySvC have not equiil opportiraitj'- iTith 
-—pthem to judge of its trp.^, and T;eXo not feel called -g-pon ±tcE to 
I credit v/hat they disbelieved, 

BiLi_jtiivi©-^rS-Tioir-ElX~TEe~'ev^ -tsufbtGrtT^" 

On August 10, 1909, sjiortly fter the erection of the house v/as 
begun, a . pi3Girj3i t procta-ed for ^-r, and Krs.Hem erly a loan of 
§1000 at a bani: iii ?eoria, and received a check for 0987.17, the 
discoun-*- valjic of said note; and they turned that check over to 
irpii'rr-fTrr'-, and he deposited it in hie omti accouirb in the Merchsjits 
national Bank, Eour days later, on AuTriist 14, ho paid Duff h 
Brown, the contractors '.7ho built said house, a check on said account 
for $200 and on September 3rd anotiiar check for y200, and on 
September 21 ano-Hier cheek for v200, making yeOO tliat 'Tse*:^ clearly 



-9- 



j<. ^oaoid^aa^p a.ow 9x£ icgnol eiia- wersig xoc^ iio:i:i aA#«^:is;,«4^ nl laxra 

i4 ■^eixo- ^oiii'o €tfrioa S£W erroxif d-srr^ fipd-sta srl ;j-3^1l! tA .;}"x &s.rodz 

jj-xrocTe eJisra i-joild- xsjc tJ«I a^ OOBS^ Elxtd- jferEw taiiJ Mb ,xocr noil erid" 

Xij3xf 9il scxT^^Jt^s ed' jf^jjonid- aj3W sii eaolsS .xocf Abil oiiJ al OOSJ^O 

iBd-o^t- 8i£o ©j;^i d"J: xwf Qd^ JSi Booslq; ae-w OOSS^ exfd- nojlfw tisxid- 5e;J-sd-a 

-1* ei sjtci itx. Qgjsado ©dd' n^^-sl^xo d-oir Bl£> ©H .0087^' *irocf.c rLirdrrexId- 

\TOAe efl JoJt^ IOC ,008V| od" 0031'$ moil i-on ,0031^1 oc*- 008S$ ektA -^orT 

.:*000:fe4 31**2:0 8 ixTd- ^Silled" {fo svari ibixroosxf jdto' ": oorojoa ^e 

^^TOQCdsa^ arid- od- Jjed-ioqe^ lovs aaw xorf eri^ itt ^;£i:oi: alild- ^o oiroTI 






^d- ^d TOXt egliut : Qd"-Ptf o-sg; Olid- ^ fiovoJtIocF d-oxx^ai -€*«»*wi0 

o3 Tisxid- f)ono3cfo £0.^3 aseaaad-Jtw ^sd^ws" ~- "" , r^^ tiiroixo 
xld"iv7 •^d-iijj-j-d'Toqq;© l^sirps d"oii evsif o^rS.&iad'a r^o..^ 1\. ei-x^ xio Toueen 



o* 31^ xxoq^^ J)8lXso l^ol d-oxi o^ ©w fui^" ^iitKgrsrd- 3^1 1:o &s^nl oi werld" 

y^ ^. .. . \ ■ , . 

■ ■ -^ '^ ^ '-'-^ -^ -^■^■:; . ■. . . ,, .X... „ 

'■^' :■ '-;■■•■.• - _ 

sew ^airoff orfd- lo xioxd-f>©i6 oiid* la^l;; •^I.i-^miB ,60,91 ,01 d-a^mfA xtO 

lo josoi B teItg :xs9li,Btc7I J&xtts •ic^'i lol JjeiXToc ^ ,iirrsocf 

'^'I^ ,VX,V8e^. 10^ Soed» ^ b&vJtao&r Lsis ^hJ^oq^ iU i£D: ::>OOlO 

X9V0 ^edt &2d& !y&a:iir& -ijed* £tfi jed'on Xi^ja^ lo aii^~v -^xxirooalij 

a*nBi<OT©!' edd- ni drctrooos ixwo sixl xt£ i-Jc .&od-l:aoqoJj. o4 -Bixjej ^-*TiH4iftri-rr 

I 
'■ Y±s.)'' y>^£q ojti",J^J[ taj^p/A no ^le&Bl a\Qb "XJsoV. .sLosff I.'3nold-x3lI 

druroDox) &i&3 ttb "Ao&do is ^Qsssod AIsb fLlisd odw a^tod-o&idrioo ©rid^ .nrroiS 

■io 'c ,002§ 10I Sosdo ToxSj-or;i5 b^S lacTxRed-qefc xio -rcc 00S$ 10I 

) f»::«rtr d-cxld- OObi}. t«KJta£aft ,O0S^ ^o^ :Coa££o lextfoms IS lodmod-qoS 



i^ 



f 



paid out ojj^ money the "^annBrlys oorrowed just after tiao laouse was 
TDGfiUii, Aia'-anaaxairt. oould not find ;iis otlior cliecirs on said accotait 
nor tlie Eitubs from xf^lch tlioy v-ere dravm, cBrt— 4^- iB fai a ? te - t iS »i a g &~-> 

in njri — f¥rmt*r -T3an3c--acc.oant.4iyas,.-iLsed„.„ta„iaaii;s„2§;,5^ on .tails— — 

j\ ... - ..« „, , - 

hgiLses "^3--3^ar^'e--«a:ireHr?y'Tr§irtTon0d" stre-ei; 

pro pe r ty ws, s . sold- ^ tlier e ^^ks- -a- -mor tgag g on.Xt.,. :£qx , .0.5500 • Sfe^" 

' loan ^ms oTjtained l)3r tlie Hennorlys on October E6, 1909, at aoout 
the time of the completion of the house. She ~an from v/Iiom they 
got it understood it xtojb to '•'e used to pay for this house, though 
ho did not pay specia-l attention to tliat as his secority wa.s on 
other real estate, I?or that loan Hemnierly received a check to 
his order for 03,495.50, He endorsed it in hlanlc and de^dvored 
it to ■^ip, v;!:-laat. On the next day afei^^saa* de'oo sited that check 
in his own account in the i.Ierchants iJations^l Bait^:, and on the sane 
day drew a check on tho,t account for §1,003 to pay the loo,n of 
§1000 the ■Sem-aerlys had ma.oQ. in^Au^iJEb, and also d-rev/ a check to 
Duff S: Brown for -SlOOO. .tF-^^Ht^OTtr.tostJ.fied that Duff & Brorna 
had done nothing for wjiich a^pollo^ri; should pay them except to 
build this Jiouse, Kv?refo r?-&- , - tills (ti00 e-' v;a 5 jx:.l :a:"" "b y'' -a 'p T :ig-3rlt9a9:t"" 

^Q3l±_JQ£--tfee•--iemtd*^■-feel:On§iag■-JyJu,.^^ — ghoref ore , £ . t le^.st 

OIt ^O oJ thr r-T^st of t^Je"~HCTlSo'1^7as paidTy"appeXraHt"~crut~Trf-irf3:e- 
fu jid^ uf Llio IIuL Ui ie ^Oys. .:;^ai#ii««^^ did not produce check to 
show what he did xTith the rest of t;.\eir moneys, deposited in his 

account , -^•■■^^ ^-^ tc: o ■.^e.c,^r^ln'r^.vl^..,>^'trrr^J^rtS'^Tin"■■^ - 

was— -so— 



thaJLJ|.S5£ia-tO'~^38y--fo-r Irall^^ housa, anjl that ii_ 

app3iied-J3^-"ap»ell-ea"fe-, IV-^-r — '.ijiiMi^^gS^^t a^^>eiiaa± testified 
that he deposited the O^t^S . jO iia^his OT;n account in the oank 



-10- 



^ 



■^xiUooQG Lisa sxo Q^Tosrlo lexIJ-o airi hsxll too. £>1 -_ , . oa 

tirocfis d-e ,80ei ,SS 'xscfoct-oO no a-^tconEEsE oift /^ it vl ' 

T^or^t fftorfv/ moil xterj siIT .^xrori ed& ^o >D[Ol^9lq;fflOo srfd" ^0 e!£.li erii 

lo a&ol ed& -caq; orf; 500,Xf ^<^ tipjopos d-fidt 49 3Eo©ifo b 
ot io9x£o s W91L5 oale Saa^daDsxrA W" ^f'sr^ ftjsd S"^!- 
rrwoiS d& l^xrcr jJ-sdo isIlid-Bod" 'tr . .OOOI^^ lol tnroiE A llsjd 

oi' iloerfo eoir&o'xc£ ;J-dfi J&jt. i- . QT5X«E"ec!iMfif- v 

alii rrl Bed-lBOC[©B ^El^er£o«r'iEla':^ Iro d-Bot ^ri* ifiMw bib eri ■■li 



/ 



bocaiisG Krs.HemnGrD^ xras averse to lis,viii3 a c'leck, and that lie 
paid fax lier that sum in cash out of tlie iio^iej in hie iron bo:: 
in '.is cellar, and ho left the impression that hepaid her tliat sum 
in money at once, Afterirards he stated that he did not pajy it 
at once nor in large sums, hut that vrhenevor she Tzanted to pay a 
hill or TTanted a little i-ioney for her ov/n use he paid her in sma^l 
suTiic from time to time, and Iiad frequent settlements vrith her, and 
in this T?ay gradually paid her the (')3,495,50, — -In tM -e-^terfre-e f 
the oroof T7e are^tisfied that the ITQOTJverlys borrowed the ""^1^500 
and place^''it in tli^ hands of ap,>tellant tO\ pay for tlie buildin^=.. 



of the-'liouoo, and tha'T^appel^.ant expended that money for that 
ipurpose. V'- • 

I rt-is—sax)xthy of note that in scare oly any-ina:^ter -vitej^-*-^-^- 

t]TJLii_£a^e_is_.,^.pellaat- corroborated by any ortrfb testimony easeept- 
tha±-xiiLJjAS-~te2"e%h0r7™nntr"ti»^)^^ of -tSiG diecks and stubs of 
check s and receipts "hieh ight throw lij?ht upon this case he 

' feeui not produced. Ho 4n,g n t?t- definitely t^u r;he e he v;as ac- 
customod to keep sucla paijcrs. He li^Le^i^iiot Gho\vit\ that "'le made 
thorough search in all places "here such pai:ers ni.rht be. In 
his earliex' e^canination he indicated that he n^t find them by 
ftirther search. His last explanation vras that Ms v;ife told him 
that at a certain house clcanin-; event she destroyed some of his 
checks and paoers, Althottgiarhltj transactions v/ith tlie"-gefflKxerlys 

- io many ■ ihoubands of " dollarr e' j^fe kept, or at least he ^ 
produced ho look account 't ^ioro o '^ . His claim that Ilrs. 

Heranerly gave him y-iOOO of Dcnhart Gocurities to repay him hat 
he liad spent of his o\7n funds in building the house rost^solely 
on his ovm testimony. 11 a~jii^si-ka:ve--'lmo\7li "^aT~r' 1^^-..,-,,.. 

valiiable t.o__him to have some di-aintcretrted— isltna S-S . to th e ti^ns- 



-11- 



■y 



4 . • ■■•■:- 

q£, ts^i Ms ,iooiio a ?jniT8id o^ se^ovs saw •^lonmeH.?- ..c 

xotf corcl oJtrf al -taifoti oilrf" 'io d-iro jfejBO r;; - - - ' or:-, .jx^ 

ruira tsflt lorl fllarorf i-siS' xiolaao'iqiiri exfd- d-x^j , _^>Il90 ejtr: al 

JLf^Tie ssl -xeii iiJtsq; aK es-rr n-wo TOd tcol "^ofrorr' ol-Jd-tX s jjL'v.i.-iv' -xo Illtf 
JSfis ,iBi£ dtlv ad-nemel^i-tea tooirpo-xl 5j3rl JBn.G ^ondttf od* emid- hio'xj: anors 



' ' ^' . ' '■ 'i 

od ©5B6 alrit- xtoctu d-d^^ wo^rifo txisi- xioM^ ad-qlsooi iaac e ice - 

-OS aevr ©If ©.exlw KE^d- ■^Iod-Jtrxi!lsB-^«ff-eerf-«fi ..Bsoir^orcq ±01: —.i. 



L .7 XOOlv- Q&t 




^^M .©cT d-it?to STCdgsicr doira .=>0J3lq' XI^ nl xfoT:jB©B £l§xroioi£3- 

Xti lasrfd- Siiil dr^ erl d"J3xId- I)eo.. .,.^-i-j; ©xf. ixolrd-BiilxriSx:^ lelltcco Sir: 

inlrf SXod- 0^l¥^ airf d-^rf* aiiT? xjoid-scislqx© ^'^ ' ' '-'''" . '?'^-->- •x-9ild"3in 

feirf 1:0 t>fiioa Ssn^O"id-30J5 ©rfS d-Jcrare ^lueol^ ^j^,... ..^... ^.^ v d-s d-.^rtd- 

..3£ld nrioXo alii ^ ' iK ofoxf'? - d-mrooo.-:; tCoocT orf Jdooxjoc'i^ 

d-firfv; nrM^sqoT od" aold-lmrooa trcritocjcr lo OOO-^f: ffllrT 0TJ33 *^r:racmr9H 

■^Islos^tae-x eai/orf ©rfd- sxtlBIlxrd' itl afioA iiwo slri !):o drceqn Jhiir^ ori 

gif JPJtt ' '. '•'" ^''^^"^ircTltwmcf- ■^■' ■ • > ■■• . u-rrou-cH '.Tcnoffltd-a©:!- nno sli' no 

-nnc^ rd* ©rid" Cv '■. '^fvl-oT fTO-: ovJ^r cj-irflii od" oIcr^jrl.cY 



+■"^ YBI"'""^ '"-'^ Q -'-i- ,iA-:-i/;:..o. ..^--g^^Vij^irTp Vy -hl-i-^i-^,4;>»v*4h-'f-7T^-; ^ JUly 12,1912, 

he induced jrs.Hejxiriiei'ly to go '.ritli >_ls wife to a lavTyer and tliere 
have a pajer drawn in ^:;;rLprlisli, a laiigaage tt-IiIcIl tlio jg - ogen ' d -e-s^adaye-e 
<i£-t}te-e^-6l?ea^o— sfeGws slio could nojb -"oad, in T7"iich GJie cortiflod 
to Jier confidoncG in ap]jol3ia »#'-e laoneBty,and that .lie iiad transact- 
ed the bucinoss of lier ?ausTDand and of "lerself fairly SQidl load no 
raoney or papers in M^ hand^s iDolonging to liori SIiGi^e is- not^-. ing 
except apjj DMsnw fr*?; testimony, to show that she Imecr then or at 
any tinio d-Ting her life, that he had taken (p4000 worth of tlie 
Denhart securities, or that he then load the Slaman note, V/e 
i approve the decision of the court oolow as to the r)4000, 
I' . 2hat the Slaman note -for (5G,395, kept in c^aid tin hos in 

the hanlr, was give:' to him "by Ilrs.Ee-nY erly to pay him for his 
services rests upon t^r i ollant^e u;~\j.pported tcstiraony^ aiir? "unn.-jig ^ 

all the circunstances his-., el ir.i ought not to stand in ^d.e■7 of the 

\ ,/ 
fiduciary relation in which,'"!!^ stood to her and the fact of his 

access to the tin hox i2^/1;he hahsjc, and of his evidence tho,t the 

proceeds of the sale pS. the Adarar, sfea'eet t)i''op'3rtyj,7ero placed in 

that bos, and of the fact that apparently no one hut himself could 

■ have talcen it out of tlic.t box, V. 

There are numerous other r:1atte^^s in eV^donee which tend to 

create doubt of tho validity of ap{5ollant's c'^airas, but it would 

■-■ undiily oxtond this opinion "t^ 'discuss the ericDenco further, Thoro 

are maiiy nfites, checks o-nd oth(^ documents in t}tis record. Our 

rule 16 ( 137 Ill.App, 625) rcc(ul\es that the abstract shall 

have s-n index which shall give the pHge where eachXsuch : h' '^hlt 

will be foamdl Sach i^arty filed an a&stract, IJei^^hor ..'.. biem 



-12- 



> 



-^oBSast^ tad o^'tBd^ Mh^x^uenod ^^^mtM^s^ ai oatiQbJtlnoo -isxftjt 

Oil iM firm ijlal^'l lilss'xsirr 16 BJt^s'MadajTxJ -^sif^ ^tf ed*' lie 

SGlrid-ors: «t^ etCMtP' X-jfejS lad" gaJt^iolcd'^'^r:. - o '^irois 

errd" ^0 Li^6i7 OOO^f iSJgiiiJ^ SM . Sxf .t^Stf* ,$^ll lad ^iTf;.5 ocrJtt ijci.: 

,000:6^1 od& od- SB wolocf d"i5T0£> extd- lo jKoisJfcoeJ5 erfif erorqq^a 
rrl 'add xii$f BiiSB ''kl ^S3C ,3ls,,% 'r«5*^ ©d'dii rssrur ' 
aid *rbl raixf -^stj olt 'qji'si© tifbH,^!!! "^cf mixl Oo .-lavJca &i;v/ ,2[cL£d orTo" , 

arid- lo wsJtV xxl M^d-s ocJ- d^fc -tp. strnM^msotlo esi& : 

Bid lo ^o&'l Bd^ ba^ -iexit oo- Jiood^a c^*i .uoiaV'xit aai&Bls^ x^slossLrt 

&d& teild- eaneBlvV'sijl 4:6 Mfi ^frC -rodf nid" ©itJ' od- easoos 

fli BoosXcf 0*a:9Wj5d'ioq:crEq: d-eex^ eiiii xGk, eiss sUd" \o aJ5l69ooiq: 

Miroo siaamM'tfird eii5 6X£ T£tf^ixic[q. ro.fe'i dfCd- Ic , od" d-j5rit 

AXjtot; d-1 Cija' ^atvila^'.. a'd-cf.' ' ' '■">iXx5V e' ' Txrol) ?d-J30io 

-^loriS? ♦aexid-id €»0£r«/i5iTQ .©.ftJ asirosl : or jioJtnlcro aiia' :,:otji:c- -^XrJiJiir 

xrxO '♦iJiooQi elj/d- xii a^noimrooJS ■ ^iIooiTo tSod-^ -^ian b'^ 









indexed the esdiiijitG. V/e have Demi put to nuch xmuecessarjr 
la"bor by this onission to ohocrve the rale. 

ITo question has been raised liere as to the cuthority of the 
probate cx)iu"*t to talce this action under section 81 of the Ad- 
ministration Act, and vire therefore do not discuss that suhject. 

The order is affir.ned. 



-13- 



..:::.: •-;; :■■:■•■ '7^- ^^:''':,:- .-.::.v '. :"^ -;:' '::.■.: ,?.-- .^ _-;_ 
:-■ ./^;■::;•■ ,<r;v..r'^ v, ■.;: ':;',- - :' or' ■■: -P- -XT .'• 

.';■'■ :":■/- ,_Jv' 0"' vr' ^;': ":. ■■■.:-■'.' ■.'"-; '^-^z no j:>,i-.:-.' 

■■,V >■:• .j'={ rv ."■.". '.■■ .;.■' J"'". -^.v' ';''u:'' .i^.';■■^^J • ■■ " 

<i T-, . . : t f ,' j - ' ■ ■■■ ^ ■ i-i' 

■'-■■•'" ' • , ' ■ -^' ' •■ 



TlXi 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, } 

SECOND DISTRICT. f ^'^^ I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing- is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



J.tji iiiih rdii.y. 

.soffto vm tf! 



v-iJi;t) b9i>ti,Jo 



II , 1^ 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth/day of April, 

in the year of our Lord one thousand nine huni'red and sixteen, 

within and for the Second District of the/State of Illinois: 

/ 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presidijig Justice. 

^ / 

HOii. DUANE J. CARNES, Justi/e. 

/ \ / ^ - ,^ •- - , 

Honl DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. : 

i / 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Cj/erk. 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
APR I A : ■ 

the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 

following, to-wi t : 



T 1 n -Tot c' -sjI t 'i c to X ". 
■ . V 



K*r 






Gen. No. 613 0, 

Mary Virginia Maroy, Excrx, ;:.:C 
a:;pella, t < 
V3 Appeal from Pecria. 

Milton S. A'arcy, arpellee. 

Dibsll, ?. J. 
^?V~" R. Sumn-r M::-rcy died in New Jsrssy on ?.^ar:h 5, 13S4, o\ming 
real and psraonal estate in Ne-/ Jgroey and iaaving a last 
will which v/aa luly admit t3d to probnts. Ey his -rill he ^jave 
his vvidovir. Mary S, Marcy, hia pirraonai property and the use 
of hii real er,tate so long- as ^he remained hi-^ 'Yidor;, but 
authorized his sxacutcrs in their iiscrsticn to sell hia real 
estate during her liistirrje and invest the proossds --nd cay the 
income therefrom to his widow, ar.d dirrotea -'-'..at at her re- 
marriage or death the exacutcrs should aell said real 
estate. The will -;ave lerjiaooee of JlOO each to his son, Milton 
S. Llarcy, to hia daughter, Hstty O.'.'lller, -^.nd tc his grandson 
Sumner M, Mill-^-r -^.nd his p;rand daughter Anna Hill=-r, said 
legacies to the grandchildren to he paid to ther. at the age 
of eighteen yeara, whiih t.:ey h:..v3 lon'2 oino© reached. Th-? 
residue of hi£ estate was given to his son, Salter E, I'arcy, 
and his daughter Lucy E. slarcy, both of '.vhoin W9r=! blind 'rorr 
birth; ind said rsaiduary clause contained certain pro-isiona 
if either or both of them should .lie vithout lawful i'.oue. 
The will nominated Mary S. Marcy raid lilton 3. Marcy aa 
executors, bu": ':hey declined to qualify and an administratcr 
with the will a-^nexed administered the sstate. The widow 
nrver r.:-;r.a: ried and ahe died on January 27, 1907. During 
her lixstime t.:i3 administrator '--.nd each of the beneficiaries 
joined in a deed, conveying certain r=al estate left by the 
deceased for C^, 6*53.47 . Ey consent of all the beneficiaries 



.03X0 .oTT .rr&O 
.^iioe9 moil X^sqqA ev 

gninvjo ,^98X ,2 rf:.i-EA* no \fsenet. wsU nl Jbelt yoiiSyl lensmB .K ~^t\ 
iesl £ anivj3Sl bci-B YserrsL vysW nJt &^.Bt&B Xjenoaisq toi'- XjBSi 
SVJB2 9ri Xllvr eld y3 .e:^j3a'0Tq of b&ittmbj^ x^"^ bjgw rfcixfw XXlv 
self srfcf baa y*'^6Q0-Q Xijxioeisq &iri ,'-(0T£M ,8 y*£J3M .wobXw eirf 

J-ycf tWoiilw siri Jb6nl£meT erfs; &£ snoX OS 9t£tB° Xx;eT siil io 

'■■ ■ J i '■ 
iBBt^'aid iioe o& noiistoalb ileiii ai aio^i/oexs aid te&tiod}sj£ 

Qdi^X'^q bn.fp aJbesooiq ©rfl ^eevni: i>nje BmiSeIti i5d galtsjc e*«S-se 

-9T lari *^ !fj3uj x^sd'osili) isnjs j,woJbJtw aid ot monlsierfif' amooni 

X4S9.i^ij3s Xtse blifods uiotuoexQ 9di dtsai ao agjsxiT^sx 

rrotliM ,noE slrf 0+ ricjse 00X$ 10 aeoOBsaX ©vjb§ XXXt.- srfT .s^rcfss 

nostnJBig eiri 0.+ ^nr ,ieXIlV.O ^d-teH ^letd-gu^t eiri Ou «ifoije:j ,3 

iixsa «isr:iM jsnnA isd-rigw^t bnsig old bm isXIXM .M asnajua 

©SJ3 srfd- i-JB msfit oi- blsq sd oi riQib£tdobns:.i-§ sdf ot eeiojEvel 

tirfT ♦Jbarfo^ai eonie vnol svM xerJ Hldw ^ais.6x nsecfilgls lo 

^ycijpM .3 larf'XitW ,noe eirf ocf- nevlg ajsv/ sJ-^^-es a in "lo swLiesi 

moi*. £»fTiXo' 6'xsw raon'r lo dtod ^A^orxsM .3 \{Oi.(J isd-ri^J^si eirf i)nf 

Bnoiel^'OTq nljB:fieo i)9nJ:3ctnoc 9BSJsJ.c ^usiUbtBei btsa hc:s: {dtitd 

.Qsjsci. lis^VisL -tsjoditr sit tiuode merL+ lo ridocf t:o rrs.ldis 1i 

ej3 Y-1-^''- '5 no;MJ:K Jbrir yo'^-'*^^- ''^ yijaM IssitjEaJtinon Lli^- srIT 

la^fBicfelxumJbJB rt£ i5fu? y^llLstup ot toniXosi y®'"'" -J^cf «bio*jl;osx9 

wo£)iw 3xiT .e;t-6^8S snc! isied-gJirtXmXjJS ^sxsn-js XXlw sii:* rftf-lw 

gniTuQ .VOeX ,TS Y^>Bi-'n>«"t> no JbsiJt erfc fcoi^ fcel^tijsrt:-: 1 isvsn 

asii^loilsnscf arf* Id rioJS© Jbas note's ^Blalmbs bc:.} sirrXcfeliX Tsr: 



under fns vrill, C6o9.47 of the conalderaticn for which 3?.id 
real e^^tate was sold wae paid to "^he wido« to be used by her 
aa she saw fit, and ths re aining |3CCC.6C \v:is placed ir- ths 
hands of :>iltcn S. i'arcy for investment, and he -vas to cay 
over the incoras and itatxtlaiitiKs skxxa iiatribut© *h- prinoipal 
in accordance with ths "/ill o: ':he testator .'Jnier this arrangs- 
rcent the four Iggacies of .ijlCO each were net paid, ana the 
intsreat on said ^-3000.00 was .iividsd equally from time to time 
b-3tv/ecn TJaltsr and Lucy. Afterwards Yifaltsr conveyed to Lucy 
■^•hatevsr interest he "nad in another piece of real estate 
left by the testator, and in payment therefor Lucy dirsotsd 
Hilton to transfer C80C of her share of aaid fund to Yfeltar's 
part of said fund, and thereafter Milton paid the interest 
on tSSOO tc Walter and en C^CO to Lucy. On February 1'" , 1913 
Walter died without is-jue ard. left a will v/hich was duly pro- 
bated, whereby he gave ail his property to hi,;- •vidcw, "ary 
Virginia Marcy, and j : de her executrix of his vvili. She claimed 
that at his death Walter owned ^3300 o' aaid fund in the 
hands of LJilton, and ds^r.anded it of Milton, and Milton refused 
tc pay it. T'.ereupon as e^ijcuttix and in her o^-n right ahe 
filed a bill in SQi^ity anainst Milton S? Marcy in the circuit 
court of Pioria CoUnty, where Milton re^idedij: for an accounting 
of the invcst.nent of said v^SOCo.nd for the payment tc her 
of the principal thsrsof and intereot thereon since the death 
of VJalter. In said bill, ^he clai:r.8d t at ths expra^sion 
"die without lawful iaaue" in the ^rsiduary ciauae oi ths 
will cf S. Sumner Marcy oieant dia vrithout i^su© befor:? the 
expiration of the life esstat© granted tc the widow, and that 
•.Then liaray S. Llaroy died while ?7alter was still living, he 
then bicaiT^e the absolute o-jmer of said |1500 and of said i-9C0 
and she therefore -.vas 3rtitied to the sair:e under the will of 



TL^d ^fcf JbsEi/ scf oi' »otivv exit oi blcq a^w bios sjbw atatoQ Is^z 

srf^f rrl tsojRiq Sirw Od.OGOo^ gnlnir. si .erl:f qojs ^iil w^e srie b-b 

Y^.:: c;f'9,ev 9ri £>nt^ ,#n»a{it63vxTl loi xoi£m .2 no#IiM lo ainrri 

I^aqiorriTc; jrf-' ©rf'i/cfiTd'eli) szxifa aJt±jtJ!fS'±aci«£i bcia eiaooni srlo' i9vo 

»d;t^ bos tbtsiq ion stsw jeIcjb© 001$ lo esiojcgsl ttjjol 3:1? tnsx 
©mi:^ o;f emirf- mo^lr ^fll^xjps Jbsijlvit ejBW OO.OOOS^ filse no tasisd-ni 

eJad-as Ibst lo eoeiq isrf3-on£ nl Jbisrf si-l ^eaisJ-ni i3V3rf'£.: . 
Jbstoa^CiJb Yo-JJ aolsisrid' d-nemYsq nJt bn£ ^^ot3taoi erf* xc'" ^lal 
e'T©:H^?f o& bnsjz bt£e lo etjarfa ^arf lo. OOS^ telaaeirf- o:^ ao&Llll 
is9i9tat erf* i^ijeq aotiiU leitMstsAt tcis. \'tau1 bl£^ 
SLSi ,ax ta-fiuicfsl aO .^owJ o^ OOV.^; no i)hje Ta*XaW o* OOc 
-oiq x^^i> ajBW ffoirfw XXiw « *leX JEn^ Buest tuoAttvi bstb tBtlsH 
^T^M »woJbiw slri oj- y^&iQqonq Bid ILji •VB3 »ri Y^i'^^s-'^'^ ,i)ad-£cr 
LeffllfiXo 9rf8 .XXiw elrf lo xlitsJ09X9 red 9b.3m bass .yoixjM ^inXgiiV 
sr. ^ rri Jbrujl Jbiee to 00€S| Jbeirwo letX^W rfi-^aL eld t£ *jsriv+ 
isfculai noitliM bas ,no*XiM lo ii Astnjsxat Jbiue ,no.^ 

ada Jrfgi^t nwo ZQd ni i>njE xitj-uosxs «J5 noquaisxIT .*! Y-sq ot 

d-ijjoixo ericf cil YoiJsM 73 nooIlM (tani^gB \ttupe at ILld jb teXil 

gnidTijJooojs nja lol ^bBbt&Qi ao^itU ©larfw .YtniroO jaiiosT lo tujoo 

lari oi- ^nemvjscr arft io!l Jbn.'sOOSSsi Jbijsa lo JnemJasvnJt arl.* lo 

df£9b eri?- aonla ciOQiBtii taQioial bcis ^osisdi IjsqlcnXaq edt 16 

noissenqxe eriJ- *J3 :f betatsiQ ede ,XXicf Jbira rcl '.ts^Xsr lo 

_pri* lo eiy/BXo xT^Aubtar^-r arf^ nl "eueal Xirlw^X ixjorfJivr all" 

erfJ sTolacf ,dx/86i ^uoriJitif eiij J-nsam yo^jbM isacauS .H lo XXJtw 

tadf Jbn£. ,woJbjtw arid- orf Jba^n^ig oJjsifae sllX a£f;f lo noli-£iIc;x8 

s;; ,^aXvlX XXl;fa ajBW le^XuW oXldw JbaXfc •^o::3lI .8 y»^J3': 

3 bus 005X'5 blea Iq ^efl'wo eJ-yXoecfjB aril err-jso^d' nari'.t 
lo XXI jbau emj^.a erf:t 0* boii . Toleiari* e.. 



n'alter. Milton -inswersd, clairr.inr; that under ^. true con- 
struction of 2s.id "esiduarj' clause, it 'eant "die at -any 
time withou"^ lawful ir;aue]" t'.mt v<'..3n T/altar died without 
i33U6, the v'hcle incoir.e passed to Lucy durin;:; her lifetirre; 
and that ^/hen ahs ohcul;: die, if vithout iasue, than by 
virtue of certain o'-her Ip.n^uage in aaii residuary ci'\uas, 
making proviaion "cr '•he dsath of hoth 7r2,lt?.r r-.nd Lucy vithout 
lai-rful i£:j;ue, the fund woull lirst go to c-xf &ai5 four isgaoiea 
of tlC'O each and ths r-'st to I^iZton S. ^''*rcy ind Hetty 0. 
lliller, cr tc the survivor of thsm if only one was f..en living. 
Under an crier cf reference the ri^aet^r took +he crocfa o.nd 
reported t -.e-t Hilton should pay from Bail funatx the coats 
and the four le-;3,oies of ^ICO each, and should iivide tne 
residue i'to t.vo squal parts, and should pay oorr/plainant one- 
half 'hereof and CSCC from the other half, arc, ahouli pay 
the balance to Lucy. The cour'': suatainc-d some and overrulsd 
other execptione to said report, and l.cld that all -^he funds 
vested in Lucy u:on the death cf Salter as '.rsll aa the income 
accruing after '"he d^at^ cf ^.Talter and fismissed the bill 
for .vant of equity. CoinpiainaDt oelow aopeBla, '*/'" 

Complainant claims that 3he is entitled to the entire 
|3300 tc ^he exclusion of the four le aciea of C ICO each, 
E^fendant olain^s that she ia entitJed to hold the entire 
fund till ^,he death of Lucy and pay h-er rr.e ircoire and if 
she dies vithout lawful icau© ths fund b'^longs to hirr.self 
•:.nd hie 'ieter, Mrs .ia'iller, if t'ley both 9urvice Lucy, and 

lie court decreed that the entire fund belonged tc Lucy. 
T-2 only perdona parties to "■ hia litigation are the complainant 
-..nd Miiton S. Sarcy. Qn this .-appeal the court ia -Tasked to 
iatermlns that Lucy has no interest in 'he |''3300 and 'hat 
the four le aoies of ^ICO each '~ere abandoned by hie le^teee 



.. ;8Tj;te^JtX asri, ^nlijjJb y^oisd o;^ tseejsq srrsooni sXorfv.' srit .ewseX 

.-.-,;,• Ycf nsjjd- ,9x/aei jj'jjprf^jtw ,5:i 4,*i|)/!fcXxi[prfe S£fe asiiv ,&S£it bus 

_g, ... '«,»BV£lC' -^xnuktBQt ijtjQ.p . n2 ag^jj^fti^X jsn^Q cils ~. sx;Jaiv 

^i/oritiv" •y;ouJ bns'. i^^X^W xt#ocf lo d&&a^ pd* "xo"^ ap xaxvoiq anljfjBs 

seioeseX ruQ'%^tls& :^(^,o^o^.iaii%,,tluo'n bavl s.rft ,«u .- Lu'bf^sL 

.,. ,0 ajd-^sK l)nij. YO^i^i^ ;-3 aoi^.XJtM oi tBe.tr sdi^ has does 00X|. lo 

.gaiviX fisn* 8£w sno ^fXno ,Xjt WSjl^f Ip apvlvix/.e 94i, o;f ia ^t9LLn£ 

sd-aoc axfc^ xitni/^ fcXjsa moil xsq . bluodQ sod-iiM d-a.-^f Jt)8i"toqsi 
jg^ .SiA;f. 8i)ivii>, tXi/oxfa Jbos ^xipJS^ OpX$ Ip eaiojs^sx tijjoI Si:[,;f bas 
-exTO #n-eiii£Xqmoo ^J£q tlyprfs Jbipte-. ,aitiaq Xa,ypd oir;» otaX e^biaai 

Y'BQ: fiXuprfe £a£ «lX£ri. lerfi-p srft mpilt 008$ firue loeisi* -i.?ri 

JfesXi/iisvo Jbnjs £!«P8 b&fil^itBsjB t*Laoo b^T ■ .ifpuJ pt, eoaelxscf ©rf* 

eJbnwlL ©£{;}■, XX JB. jfjirlJ JbX.e^d' J;.fl£. ,*ioq6x Li^a ot anoit'^osxs 7SilJ^P 

snnoorcX erit bjs XXsw 8£ t^^XjaW Ip rfcfJBsiJ j>rf;f cpcxx XO£/sI |iX Jbeitssv 

XXXo' 9£it iisesifflSiJb i)ae is^fX^W lo i|*j5c. ni^ji gnli/ico* 

^,_ 9il;J-rxe sxf* pt JbeXitid^ne at sds. tsd;} aaitslc &ar.nisLqm60 

. A '.' c ■ ■ - .• - - •■ , - . . - . . 

\., ..tfoJES OOX; 1,0 asiofi-'.eX :moJ edt. io noiBnioxs sd^ pt 00£S# 

t>TXtixQ sdi fcXorf .pj Jbsld-itfls ai sn'e *^j- emijeXp i-njBfcae-.aa 

, _. 11 JEifUP..a(np.o.ni .SfJi lari ^j?q Jbnfi "^fcuJ. Ip ^^fjsst srfct XXX* Jbru;^ 

IXaeo^Jtrf ot eanpXs-cf Jbnx/1 ,»d^ aueeX Xulw£l ;J'uorf;tl-- ssifc srfe 

tn& tX^uJi Qotviua rt^ocf x^^^ It,, .jtt9LI.ili,»-iM. ^xs^bIb Bid i>flr 

^^ ., .^cw*I p*. -bsanoXso' Jbnjjx atXi-flo en':t jf'.*rf;t ijsaiosX tiuoo sri" 

i'njenisXqmop arid- aT,B ixoi*jaal,J2X aX4'^ 0* asii-iJBq Bnoaisq^ijXrip sdT 

ot Jteiar. aX i-iupo &d& Lssqcj:. aXrf^ xiQ .^fOTJoK .8 nPuXlM baji 

^ OOea^ eri' ni tBQXBial pfi ard ^fouJ tsdi BatmrsiBL 

ased-JEgsi .bsnptn£cli; aisn doJis OOX^ Ip aalOJB,..,9X %sjq1 9dt 



wlien tl:ey ccnssntsd to delivar s' 639.47 of '■he proc^sda of the 
real S3t- ts to '■hs ^ridcw of R. Sumnsr :.'arcy. These le?-atse 
and Lucy ^sre not partie^i to thia suit. In equity 2V3ry person 
havinrr equitable or is'-;al righto in 'hz aiibjsct r.atter cf 
ths 3uit rhculd be fr^ade a party. It is not necsaaary that 
th3 ^ack cf proper parties should be set up bj? either olds, 
for whenever the court finds a lack of proosr p-^.rtiea, it 
"will, ex officio, tak-c nctice cf iuch Oitiissicn," ?-''J v.-ill 
refuse to ;:roo3ei in the suit till th; plsadingo have b?3n 
amended and ths emitted partise brought into court, ^rsntioe 
V Kimball, IS 111. 31S; Granqaiat v h'p,st3rn Tub-; Co. 34C 
111. lo3; Ccnv.-ay v Sexton, 3'-«j 111. 5^:; Nolan v Earnse, 363 
111. 515; and authorities there cited, to .vhlcb raight b$ 
added many other cases , :.nd iC CYC 141, V.'c arc cf opinion 
that Laoy E. Marcy, H-2tty 0. hi:.ler, Sur.ner M, Miller -'.nd 
Anna Miller, if they arc atill living, and -^he persons ^"ho 
lerally rcpr'sent the inteeeats cf any cf them who r/iay be 
deceased, must be ,; cue p?,rtie3 to -^hia litirration before the 
court haa lawful pcver to decide ^he questicnc r-^.isel by 
the pleadings and evidence ^nd argu.ents here presented. 

The decree is therefor^:- reversed and the caucs is rerr.andsd 
to the circuit court of Pscria Countyj -.Tith leave to appellant 
to .take parties .o the suit the peraons fetxaiHssiatx* herein 
above indicated, and to make such a;r.end rente to the pleadings 
ao aiay be proper. If appellant should elect not to take such 
course .vithin a reaacrable tiire, then the court is jirscted 
to aismios t.ie bill. Appellant and appellee ■vill each pay one- 
half of tho coats 01 thia court. 

Reversed and rsrAanded v;ith directions. 
Niehaus, J, took no part. 



BBts-sel aasi-iT .xotsi^ TsnmyS .H lo woJbxw 3r[.-?_ od- fifitB .iaeT 

lo T©*i-B.T, d-os^dye erf:* nl li^JrfgjtT Xjsg^i ag sXcfetiiJpe 3^Vijrf 

jf^ifj Y^caaesoan ton at tl ,xi"^^<i £ &i>£^ ^^d bluQiia ttue ecit 

,eJbi8 isrfcHe igcf qu tee scf bLifode aeitfi^q isqoiq lo io«I ©rfo" 

LllTc Jbn.c " ,noieeXmo /loue lo ,9cld:ox(i,.S3f.6d', ,oiol^*o X3 ^XXiw" 

risecf ©VBrf asniJfciseXq ^rlt XX^S- J"Xuai ©iid- ni; Jbei©,oox<^ _oct-.,,&.Qu^&T 

©oiifHST? .tixjoo oi-fii trf3Uo;td ,iiai*:tjsq Jbad-i-itoo .ed,^ Jowjs Jbsfjxranie 

Oi'S ,oO sdJjT rfie;tssW V d-eijjp^n^'rO iexs .XXI ,0X .,XX£c'iiU3 r 

88S ,aem:jB3 v neloVL (83 .XXI cl-S ,ixoi-X83 v Tj^wnoO (SSX .XXI 

ecf ;t;isiffi doirfw o* ^JbsJlo. s.iSili. .afiid-XT;oii;tj^£ -bfls, i^Xo .XXI 

noltttqo ^0 eij3 sW ♦Xi'X OYO 0£ JbfLs., , aeaisO -x&dio ijnjsm X)sX>,b5 

&«p. leXXlM .M if3niTw3 .idXlXM .0 \c;^;t8H ,,^oi£M .a; . Ypi^'I t^it. 

orfw anoaieq 9rf+ has ^-^atrli ILtie sx^ ^lo^^t ^^t. niMiX^ ■Bank 

Yd bBBLst enolt^Bup Bdf ©JbiooJb 0* lawoQ Xulw^X sari tiuoo 

.Jbsj-neesxq axerf sttte-iWg'is i>ff.e.. tonstXvs ^fl.e asnlJbr.sXq Qiii 

fisfjnjB.Tjsx ax eeujec srf.l .ins ,Jb9ax9vex axoisxerif ei aaxost an'T 

i-/iJBXXaqqa oc^ ©VJseX rf*ivv' ^^JrurpO £lxos<J lo cfxuoo JiuoiXo ©u'cf Oo 

nldxeri nsisz'siazzif arroexsq axlj' ^iue ©rft 0'> B^li's.&q, &:3i^ oi 

a^rtl&asXq Qd* oi eiraavtctQms dosJB ©al^iu. o& bna ^Jb^tBolbat avotf^e 

douB ©is* o* ton J'osXs tXiforfe +n£XX©qq^ 11 .xaqo^xq ©cf x-sin a-^ 

JbdJ'osTifc ei ,d-iuoo ©ri* aedt ,8iii* aXsCfjsnoaasx £ nXrftXvf ©axwoc 

-eno Ysq rfo^o XXiv/ aalXaqqjs tap, tn^^XXsqqA >.XXicf adi aGlmaii: ot 

. »lxjJOO eXrft ^0. fliacr •? ''■ "o "Hi;-! 
»8noXJ'09xib d&J:7{ bpbfiBtRSi^.bae, i'saxsys^ 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. ( ^'^^ I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing- is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of oui' Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



AvjW 



',{'•;■ Hi 



iif b-fo 



/ 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, / 



n 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice. I 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice, |«. 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. ^ ^ ^ '--J -- . rl « ,Q 



. DAVIS, Sheriff 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

"^n i ^^ ]^]o the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



o bn,? h^ihr.u-- enrn .5. 
fj J E -[ 1 1 c 3 ^8 I'd en: '\7. ioiii'ir 
i .; 3 u ^. ■f.n / r i i; € 't ^ , . 



no :fiw-ot , 3l;'rj3WTe.+ '=^ « 



Gen. No. S184. 

James T. Burns, Admr . etc. 

appellee. 
V3 Appeal from Kankp^kes. 

Nsllis Clark, appellant. 

Dibsll, P. J, 

On September 7, 1S15, J-ir.ea T, Earns, Adrr-iniatrator 
of the estate of Ci-rris Langion, iscs-xsed, brought an action 
of assumpsit against Nsilia Clark in the Kankakes Circuit Cou:-t 
and filed a daclaration coniistin^j of the con-rnon counts, .vitii 
an affidavit attached thereto that iafsnlant was indebtad to 
plaintiff i,: the atim of C«3,V7S.S0. Dcfsndant filed a plea of 
non-assumpalt, accorr, anlsd by an affidavit that she had duly 
stated the case to her attorney ?,nd ^as advlead by hini tiiat 
she^ had a good defsnae on the rr.'Srits to the .vhole of the 
plaintiff's demands, and that she believed that to be true. 
There vva^ a jury trial and a ver.iiot for plainti.'"f !or |51?S,90, 
and judgment for plaintiff therefor and defendant a:peals. 

Mrs. Nellie Clark, Mra. Carrie Langdon and Levi Benjamin 
ware aiatere ard brother. Dr. F. R. Langdon, 'gusband of Carrie 
Langdon, ;ied at Louisville, Kentucky, early in February 1313* 
Benjamin and Mra. Clark Tvent there to th; funeral. Mrs. 
Langdon '-vaa auhfering frcni an incurable iiaeaae and after 
the funeral her brother -vnJ slater brought her to the home of 
Mrs. Clark in Xanka'-.ee, Illinois. IItq, Langdon had money in 
a bank in Louiaville, and bafcr-3 they left there Ih-s. Clark 
was in pcaseosion o^ the amount Mrs. Langdon had ir: the bank 
in ^he ijhape of a draft or check vrhich 3he brought with them 
to Kankakee. Shortly after they reached Kankakee, probably 
the next day, -.nd on February 13, 1913, Mrs. Clark opened a 
oheokin ■ account in a cank in Kankakee in -he nams of "Mrs. 



,se:!lriiniili caoil X/isqqA av 

,^jfn£!XXec,q£ ^iTijIO siXXsW 

■ '■■ .L .? .XlscfXa 

.'fd-iw' ,e;Jnjuoc; nomTioo sdi lo ■^al^Bhenoo noJ:*i?'ij?iosb >c talll toe 

o;t ts;+cf9i)nJ: aav.- ;tnBtn9lst ctijflt o*8i9fI:t tsrfOi;i-*JB Jlv^tlll^ a£ 

lo jBSlq £ teXil ;frcj?tnsl&a .0e.2VV»£^ lo auirB ©xl^ nl lliirii^Xq 

vLut b£:d srf£ tsri* tivjsbillji as X'^ £)©injB-mo6oij , Jieq«u;aajB-non 

;^j£::'t iiiifl xti bsel.vb^ 8.ew X^n.e ^fdrtiotcfje isrf od- oejso ©rfit bed-xjfe 

6ci* lo ©Xorfv/ arf:!- od" ed-lnsm srlj no senslsi) fcoog j3 Jb^rf exla 

.eu7* sd oi t£A* fcsveiXscf sn's Jfi3fi:f bn£ ^mbnsmab ^^IttialeLq 

,0e.9?X£'^ 10' J/iJicili-iq lol d'o.i.-'xsv fi. cub Ijit-t ^'xu j; ^ &£y 9i9iiT 

.aXs9qox d'n^ijnslsb fcrijs aolsisxlrf- llld-nijsXq lol d'nsmgX)^^ ijns 

nl.tuSQnsa IveJ br.s aob-gci'Sj. sXtijsO .6tM .^fi^IO slXIaH .stM ''♦*^ 

sXii-eO lo br.jsdess^ ^aob^gaJ:J. .K .1 .'xQ .leri^oio' true aaeJeia sieve 

*{;XSX x'l'BU'sd?'^ nl i^Xxee ,^:!i;cud-nsX »©iXiveXx;oJ i£ bslb ,noLsn-eJ 

.eiM .XjQTanirl edf o;J- sisri.^ tnew iajsIO .siM Lop. nXmj3?;n©a 

iccMr Jbrip a«JBBBic sXcfjsiyoxii n£ ji:oi1 3niie-.'u& e^sv, aob-gcisJ. 

lo smorf 9rf:f oi- lari i'dsuoicf to^bxs ^nr larfS'oia' isrl leism/'i srlt 

ni ifsnoai tjjrf noiisnfiJ .eiM *£JtoxilXII ,9s:'£:fnJs3T rtX :fijsl0 .aiiJ 

iiBlO .evM oigrft JleX ysri* eiolsd i)nj3 t©XXjtv6.tuoJ ni ^fnjsd ^ 

jLci£': srfd- r^Jt £u:ri noX^gn.eJ .aiM drujom^ 9ii:t '0 noieeseeoq nl asw 

merfrf if;}-iw trfgwoid srfe rfoirfw ioorfo 10 d-l^ilj £ lo eqjsxle ori.+ nl 

YXtfJBcfOiq t99Ji£ila£li Jb©rfOJ3si Y©rf^ is^lfi ^fX:tioxf2 .Q9:)L£AnsS. oi 

js fcenar^o 3(a«X0 .aiM ,CXeX ,SX Yi'«^^<^e1 no bns: i^sib *x©n ©rU 

.81M" lo eit^n ©rfl nl ©8:^£>Inj5X nl aim?:.' js nl j-nuoooiJ -nl:jfo8rfo 



'>. 



a 



p. R. Langdon cr Nsllis Clark" and :l9pcsitsd on that day 
to aaid account saicl draft cr check in the aum of C 5, 179.9© 
and r3c;iv3d a deposit b^ok in the aame name. On June 5, 1313 
Mrs. Clark drew out that aum of ;rionay ind clorsed the account. 
On June S, 1913, Mrs. Lan^jdon died. Thereafter appellee bec--r:^e 
AdminiatratoT of Mrs. Langdon' a estate and brought this suit 
to rscover the airount of sp.id deposit. Mrs. Clark, in defense 
proved by various "ritnessaa declarations by Mra. Langdon; some 
to the effect thatshe had 'civsn this draft or this n:oney or 
all her money to Vrs. Clark; -iid others that she -wanted Ci 
intended to give this money or her property tc Vrs. Clark. 
Mrs. Clark had kept a hou.di of i.l .Came and is the party hxs 
named aa appellant or plaintiff in r-rror in People v Clark 
137 111. App. 613, and 363 111. 156. A pellee in cross sx- 
amination of appellant: witnesaee -md c'rherwiae proved that 
the place where Yrs. Clark kept ¥ra. L--ingdon till h:-r death 
was or had b=en a house of ill-fame, ani aomfelled aeveral 
of her witnesses to -ivc testimony tending to sho'.v that they 
v/ers or had b'^en inmates of th t house, and it is contended 
by appellant that it was error to permit this kind of cross 
examination to defame the vyitnesoee and acpellant, and tnat 
thereby the jury ivsre greatly prejudiced asainst appellant, 
and that but for the great stress laid uron this subject by 
appellee's counsel they jury must have returned a verdict 
for appellant* The kesper of a hou^e cf ill fame is entitled 
to a fair trial in a suit involving property rights, and 
it has been a serious c^uesticn vit^ us \Yhether ^-he rights 
of appellant were not unduly prejudiced in the minde of the 
jury by the course prususd by appellee's counsel; and vmether 
a new trial ought not to be awarded for that reason. There 
is however, a con.lition appearing near the close of the proofs 
which satisfies us that no other verdict could 'r.ave baen rendered. 



£ 



YJst tsrii no Jbetisoqeb bn-z "aliJBlO sillsK 10 notgn^J .H .? 

«9.SVI,S| lo iwje S)iU at iosilo to tlBlfc '&i^a tauoodj?. bt^s ot 

tlSI ,c ani/L nO .dm^n SiUEe srf:f ni i'ood *ieoqs£ .'? Jbsvieosi f>n£ 

.drcx/ooo^ en;f Jbssolo tn£ y©^o«!i *o 3!UB cf^rlj c^I;o waixj 3fT£lO .eiM 

QiiLfoea' ssIIscgjB i3J-l£©i©ifT .i5slt xioLgrfjsJ .e^M ,olSI .S ©niTC nO 

.+ li;8 8iri* ;trisjJOicf bnj? ei'.eJ-BS a'flo£>snsJ .eiM lo TO^tjBTd'axniiKijA 

seaslst al ,a£xsIO .eiM .JisoqsJb Jbiaa io d-owoaie Qil;t isvoost: ot 

s-noB jnobgoeJ .eiM \fa'" eaottet^LoQb eeaBsnllw euoiixjv ^Ci Joevortq 

TO >jsiioin Btdi 10 itlfiil Qtdi navig X)i2xf erisi'js.'i* i'oslls sdj- od 

,*g Ijstxijsw e^e J^rfd- Bisri^o £»ai=( ;iijsl0 .aiM .0* yenom isrf IX£ 

axH YiJ"i^<i Q^'* si J) AS •fflusi III !to Aii/oil ^ ;fq8::{ is^rf jlijaiO .eiM 

. i^ifilO V QlqosSf ni xoart3 ni ^llJ-jii^q 10 iasLLsqqjs ma b^^rassi 

-X9 eeoio aX saXItqqA .831 .'ill Sas bnsx ^Sia .qqA .III VSI 

tsrii Jb8V0i:q aa-tv/iorito i)nj-) aaeasni-J:?/, cJjrwiXIS:qq« lo rtoi&^alsis 

dt&^b led liti n0i.2n.BJ .61M d-qs2f iijsXO .a-xM ateriw eojaXq adij 

l£i9VSG £)sIl3qraoo iru- ^eroal-XIi to ©Bx/ori £ nsacf Jbsxi 10 a£M 

X^di tAdi v:ode oi gniijxxed- ^nomii'escf syiv^ qrf- esassncHw lerf lo 

tsiii9;fnoo ex ti ijnje ,8eyorl 1 xi* lo eed-^mni nsed Ljsri 10 diaw 

aeoio lo baJLi airfd rf-imiaq ocf 101.19 ajsw i:^.j£dt jfn^XXsqq* ifcf 

*^* bas ,*nj8XI©qq£ Jbnij eaaeancJ-iw Qdt ,amj8let ot noid-jsnimex© 

e^njeXXscq^ tanXjag^ jbsoiJbi/Qsaq >cXd'-6Sig aisw ^-lul Qdi "idsr^di 

YCf tfosQcfus exrf:^ nocu bis^L eaeita tsaig ©4*. "lo^, ,;fycf t-aili JbJia 

•, *oXiiiev f? jb^a1wc^91 svra" d-sijm \;iirt ^sii* Xsam/oo a'98lXeqqj3 

b^l^tim el amjBl XXi lo ©ewod a lo icaqesaf silT .i^njBXIsqqa .aol 

■i>nje ^ai^rigii ^jtiaqoio gnXvXovnl d'Xue e al IjUt* lijsl « o;f 

.^ 8*rfsli exit laritariw au iJ*Xw noid"69jjp auoiiea « nsscf ajsri cM 

eriJ lo jiitfiJcfli. exl.t nl £>9oiiiJJt«iq \iubau ioa etd^r tuGilsqie, lo 

i;.'.. jXaenuoo «»saX.l9qqA "id taweuiq aaox/oo aiit \<i \iu\^ 

sienT .nosfioi tfi.:^ ::oJfciJ3W« ©d od^ ton i-rfguo IsLxt we a ~ 

•;q tiit lo saoXo erf* a«oxs gnXxjsacriC noJ;tXx>noo ;: ,i6V9wo4 eX 



3; 



A few daya bsfors Mr3. Langdon diea Mrs. Latim:-;r, a daughter 
of Mrs. Langdon by a former iTiarriage, and li'^r husband, cams 
from their ho.ria in Springfield, Ohio, to I'ankakse u:on a 
telegram from Mr^i Clark and rsmained there till aft^r ths 
funeral of Mrs. Langdon. Tasy had a oonveraati on \cith Mrs. 
Clark after the funeral concerning this money .epositiSd in the 
Kankakee Bank. They tsstiiied that Mrs. Clark at -^irst denied 
that there .vae any money in the Kankakee Bank belonging to y'rs, 
Langdon, and that when Latimer told her that ^hsy had b^en 
to the bank and aecertainsd ■ that Mi-a. Langdon had monsy en 
deposit there, Mrs. Clark "hen admitted to them ths,t ^heir 
mother had about C3»--CC en :lepo3it in the bank. In rebuttal 
Mra. Clark wai called ac a vvitness in b-?r o "n behalf as to 
said conversation, r-.nd 'the placed the conversation at a dif- 
ferent hour ox th3 day xrom -vhat the LatiiTiCra lid, ?.nd 
gave a soinewhat lifierent version ol it, but et^^ted that sfec 
in that convsraation ^aid to theatit (otsaRx "She (moaning 
Mrs. Langdon) gave all ttfj rconey she had to me to pay h-sr 
bills." I This ^ms entirely in r^-Tmony "ith her o-nening ths 
acoaunt in the bank in the name of Mra, Langdon cr herself 
pl-ao-ing i^rs. Langdon' 3 name first. Mra. Clark had a savings 
deposit in the same bankac, ^nd if she had posasasion c f ^fee 
draft or check from t.'rs. Langdon --.s her ovn property by 
gift from her sister, she would naturally hovs deposited it 
in her en account. The form in which it -.vaa deposited '^as 
oonsicitent .7ith the idea tt at it was' still Mrs. Langdon's 
money, but that Mra. Clark could c' eck it out in payment 
of L'rs. Langdon' s bills. Under the atate of faots disclosed 
by Mrs* Clark' 3 evidence, if it was true, ahs could rot be 
permitted to retain the entire deposit as her own, bat she 
would have bssn at liberty to aho'.v by competent .witnesses 
what bills Mrs. Lan^^don incurred during the four months 



Qdt rrsd-^^ I£J:;t atsrf* Jbaflipmsi Jbna ^ifiJSlO *8iM moil aveigele* 

• a^M xfttv noiJfaeisvfloo js JbErf ^eriT .no£»s«-eJ .aiM lo X-Btcsmji 

erf?- nJt i)©:MaoqsD ^snon eirf;*- gninisonoo Xsiienirl ecit isJls ii^IO 

no Ys^ora tsrf noLgrt^J .biM tsd:^ ■ iieni-stasoejs isn. 

IjBi-*x/cf3T rtl ^^a&d srft rti Jleoqet no bos,et tsjods bsd lerf+om 

o:^ ejB lIjBffsd rr.'o TSrf nl aoencMw £ sjb tsXIi . . -iM 

-life i3 *JF itoi^;B80C9vno6 ©fl^' iieojBXq arfs' Jbn^ «nol*B6T:9vnoo Jbi^a 

■ tnr ^tll Bisiaiisd tiit t^dw taorl ^j&b sdi lo rujod irtsie: 

e^e d-*ri;t betsfa iud ^ft lo noieisv trtsisiilb tjeriwemoe js sv^g 

gnlnjs'sra) ©riB" XKJsaicr) tasdi ' oJ £iijse iioJt(fj36TSVnoo Jjsrrt ni 

Vsrf YJSQ o^ s* od- bjsff erfs Y^-noaj Bdi 11a 9V£s,-g {a^b-ga&d .eiM 

■ t ail' J SfllffmjO ' i ' m f ilJivv x"'OTnc35if rwi-Hfi-e-rii^^ l;^'' . eX II d 

egnlvjea £ tBrf iiJSXO .e-xM *4^i^^-^aiffii"S^-ttot:s'^£fdt—r9'^^' §tii9 r B£q 

srit 1 noi'eeeeeoq Jbisrf srfs ITJbrrjB ^iwfnjBcf etaca sxfit nl j-laoqeis 

Y<^ )f*i®c[OT:q nwo isrf bb ' noljsnflj .aiM raoil iosrio io J-^JBii 

ti fcad-lsoqai; QVBd xll&tutMa bluov srie ttretale lerf moT'i jfllg 

e^TR Jbad-laoqaij B£W *i dolriw nl miol" srfT .&nvooo£ u at 

a'no&gnjsJ .stM XXld-e ajsw it tad^ jsaiil sifJ ditv taat^taaoo 

Jnsa^.Yijq nl tuo it io9:'6 bltjoo ii^lO .aiM 4'JBiJd' iud ^X9aoai 

teeoXoeljt tJojs'i; lo 9isi6 9df letntT .aXllrf e'nolianjBj .aiM lo 

^d ;fon tXx/oo sxfe ,9x/5t eosw" *1 W ,aonsJblve e'3('t.srD .siM x;cf 

aria tad ,nwo lerf^B-n rf-leoqsb eilcfn© ^dt fxt^ . isctllmirq 

asaa&n^lT, i'nsitjqmoo ^ii'sdtL ts, nssd avjerf tXjt/ow 

•xi^nom tiio\ srfj 7-nltx;£> Jbsi ;jonl noij^njBj .eiM aXXld it-edw 



she livad in Mrs. Clark's hcne, and the prcp-3r amount of 
sujh bi.lla, and that she had paid therr. or bsoome liable to 
pay them. Appellant contends that the court refused to permit 
such proof. Thi3 is a fltisxajB ini3ar-creh9n£,ion of the reoora. 
Her counsel did then ask hsr: "Did you pay all hr bills?" 
and the court subtainei an ob;i3Ction thereto* Under 'he 
statute Mrs. Clark -.vas a competfint ^'itness as to the conver- 
sation .vith the Latiif.sra after the death of Mrs. Lan'jdon, 
"but she \tas not competent to testify to -vhat she did in the 
lifetime of her iiister. If she had answered this question 
"by "Yea" that v/ould have been irnmat^rial. A:oarer!tly th^ 
idea in the minds of oounael was that if ahe testified she 
had paid all cf '-Irs. Langdon's bills, that voull entitle 
her to retain the entire fund. "No effort 'vas :.'.:.de by -ppellant 
to prove -.T.iat bills '.?ers i^currsd nor .-vhat eur.a 3he paid upon 
any billa Tor Mrs. Langdon. A^oarently ah© thought proper 
to rest her oaae solely upon he claim that "-he fund "/aa an 
absolute gift to .er. Dr. Erov/n, a v.itness for appellant 
attended Mrs. Langdon durin.ij the entire four months. He '.vas 
not asked t.is amount cf hia proper charges for hii ^.rvioes 
to her, nor ^'vhether he had been paid, nor by whom. " As appliant 
conceded aacording to ..--t cu-n testimony, in h^r conversation 
vith the Lati-Tiers, that this fund .vas placed in her handa 
to pay "he bills of 'irs. L.ngdon, and ?„3 she did not chose tc 
prove that she had paid any .such bills nor nor; rr.uch she paid, 
the jury could not do other.vise than return a verdict for 
appellee for he full amount of the Jeposit. 

The court ^^--ve an instruction for appellee that .under the 
pleadings they had no right to deduct from the sum, if any 
due plaintiff any sua defondant r^ay h-ivs earned by caring 
for Mrs. Langdon daring her l?,3t illness or which she may have 



o;t ©Id^il ©fflocscf 10 !i!©rf;f Jbijeq iiBrf srfa *«n':t- l)ac ^oXXid ri-wua 

.i^ooex ©iIj ^0 noianerfaiqaveBim aiaxstxi b ei eiriT .Ioot 

•j : ' !'5"BXIid a;r( XX^ ^t^a *fpY JciQ" ;t3ri ia'x: asdt JbiJb Xaanuoo asH 

- :' t^J^^^r. -tt^JDf^ ..o^sasxld- :no/*os{;cfo xi£ JbsnXjstfaue tijjoo e 

-7avnoo axle* Oi aj6. wanrf-iw ;tj3&*aqmoo £ e>sr iisIO .e-xM ei-i/JjBJe 

,noi>gflJ3J .eiM "io. diAeh arid- isd-ljs aismijffiJ eriif rii^xr noid-^s 

Sil* £ii bib eris J-bxIw od- ^'iid'aed- o& d-nsd-aqmoc d-on b,8w en* dud 

noidasjjp eirfd' i)9isw8aii Jbisrf arie iX ►aad'aia isri lo amid-slXX 

_ add:, Y-td-cai^qqA .Xjaiaed^jsmtai nssd ©V£il isXuow d-jsx::: "sdY" x'^ 

6dB b&fitiaQ^ eris Ij: t^dt b£W Xsanuoo lo acnXm arid^ at Jiebi 

eXJi^na islwow *j?rid- ^aXXicf e'no£)sxtfiJ .aiM lo 11b Jbi«q*JbaB^ 

•-■TjsXX»^,r ^jd ©&£»? a«w I'lo'i.'ia ott .6aal sTid-ne erfJ nijad-ax o* lari 

noqu Jbi^q erie emija (f,erfv? ion bsirrx/onX aiaw aXXXd i'^riw av.oiq od- 

■t^tncT ihif3i#«fW -•e^*e--^fd'-fr9TErqrfA .noJbgflJBJ .aiM lol aXXXd ^njs 

— TTB BJftW ba v'i g f f » -•■ ^gffth mi-gtrr' S7! • fioqw ^l^f oa ^«*8- Jsaii-.-*-**?— ©^ 

■>-^*^^** "^ tnaXi^et^a lol eesnJiw £ ,xiwoi£ ... . isj lo -e da 

e-ETs &E .arij-aoffi isjo't s?ld-aa arid- •sntissb flol>axusJ .«tM ijeJbnad-j-B 

asoivars axri lol easTJOxfo leqoio atd lo driwoaws arid- JbaaCas ifon 

d-fi£XXoq£ aA^.moriw yci" ion ^bl'3q, nssd JojBri sri Tsrid-ariw ion »ieri od^ 

aoid-£6i9vnoc iril nl .^nomid-aad" xmo ie:I od- gnljcioooa tebscaoo 

4.»aJtG«ri leri ftX Jbao^Xq bjbw ijfujl airid- ^-^rid- ,ai8mXd-JBJ arid ditn 

od- eeorio &oa Lit arie ejj ^n.p ,iioL3rt:J .eiM lo aXXid arid \£q. od- 

,Mi«q arl© riojjat wori ion eXXid ri&i/e >fnjB bleq fijcri aria tjsrid- avoiq 

lol Joibiav 5 nijudsi njeni aeiwierid-o oh ion biuoo ^fxi/j; scli 

.JXsoqafc ari^ lo tnuoiaa llul odt lol asXXeqq£ 

arfd^ latm/. d-^rid aeXIaqqjs loT: noid-ouid-anl tis avc;^, Jiuoo ariT 

^iiB It ,njue arid mo-il toub&b od-. d-rigii oa ir.ri ^s: i Bgatbsdlq 

::o ^d tanifis evFri ^^m d-nsXinelei; mwa ^nja llXd-nXisXq ajjL 

ev/ : riQlriw 10 aaertXXX d-', gnliuXj xioiisnjsJ .aiM lol 



expended for the "csnsfit of Mrs. Langdon. T'e oonoluae that 
if Mrs. Clark recsived t'.;e fiini for the piar^ose admitted by 
her and had x.a.dd 3uoh expsnditurea, she .-.as sntitled to 
recoup ths s,mount 'rliereof. Rscoupment ia tlie act of abating 
a part of a olaioi on 'vhicii one i^ sued, by ms-^r.B of a legal 
or equitable right resulting froit a counter claim arising 
out of the i^aine translation. It rests or the principle that 
it is Tust and equitable tc aettle in one action all claims 
growing out of the aanie :;ontra<it or transtroticn. It ie a 
reduction of the dauiagss cxaimed by plaintiff by proof of 
Gircuni3tancss connsoted '-vith the trans-ction on v.hich the 
plaintiff's claim i-s based -vhich chow "nat it r/ould t5 con- 
trary to '.i^cod coiisciance to carrriit plaintiff to recovsr the 
fu 1 arr.ouiit of hio claim. o4 GYC 63'S, Si-i . This can ns dcns 
under '.he general idsue, Ahich in this cas3 /vaa the ? ea cf 
non assumpsit. Higgina v Lse, 16 111. 495] Babccck v Trice 
IS 111. 4S0; Turner v Kettsr, 5S 111. 364j Murray v Carlin 
67 111. 336j Ccoke v Preble, 3C Ixl, 331; 34 CYC 643. For 
statutory reasons this xack of necessity i^or a ppecial plea 
seems not to apply to a suit on a note .Watsrinan v Clark, 7S 
111. 438. But as- there v/as no evidsnos from vhioh the jury 
could allow Mra. Clark any aum for services or aioburGerents 
on ?,ccount of Mrs. Langdon, the living of ^hs instruction 
in that form did not harm appeilarit. The instruction should 
have said that ^he jury could not do tnis under t ^e -vid^nce, 
instead of under the pleadings. In the viev* vre ts-ke ci "he 
evidence of Mrs. Clark and h^T failure to iTtstxKsi introduce 
any evidence showing A'iiat, cf anything, she had expended for 
Mrs. Langdon, the other questions argued by appellant are 
Immaterial and need not b3 dieausaed, further than to say 
tiiat Latimer was a competent witness to v/hat he and Mra. 
Clark said in their conversation, and he did not relate what 



Xd tQtilmi)£ eeoqiarq erfit TOl bnilfl srf;t ^svisosi itcsIO .eiM 11 

^ '•■''■ ot f)9ld-J:Jns ajBvr sxfs ,89ii;;J-i:i)neqxe riox/8 el)i3m fijerl i)njs isrf 

"'•gniisds to d-ois srfd- ei itasmquoosfl .lo^isrij- Jxwoffljs erit qi/oosa 

Xjs^sX j5 -0 a.TjF.sm ycf tJb©0s ai eno xloirfvi' no atl^Io £ 'lo tz£q £ 

gnieiTJS mijelo teicwoo r. moil gnlJIuesi drfgii 8Xcf£*iyp9 10 

'*'tJ3rf:f alqioniiq ari:f cio eteei &1 .no i;cfo;?,an*5id- ©ntss erfcf ^o isjo 

eteljsXo XXb floiJo^ ano ni eXutj-st o;t oXde:^iJJps bas teul si tl 

^' j&ht tl .aolfQ3Bns^'x& 10 tf-bjBii-noc omjBs 8rf:t lo &iJO grixwoig 

"'^ lo looTq YCf liJti'nljsXq ycf Jbami^xo essamjBi) 9rf;t 10 flox*&jJi)S'x 

e/id^ xfoidw no no-t*o?^8n£ii' erfj^ d&lw JbstosnnoQ esonjsd'eim/o^tic 

-nba*^ ecf JbXjJow j-J: tsd"- worte rfoirfw fcea^cf el ihIjsXo e/llxcfni-sXq 

y£f* asvoosi ot Itltal^Lq ^f.i^ieq od" 8onsXoenpo Xioog od'^ ■YTJS^d' 

9tt(Sb 3d njso airIT . ^sa ,£Sa OTD i^€ .cjIjsXo elrf to Jnuoas X wl 

'" lo J8e q ^rf:^ sjbw s8£0 slrfJ nX rioirfw t«JLf8al X^iansg exft lar'nx; 

• -'^!r*'-v; ;*■&.■?'-■■■: J.V -■■■^'■■■' '■ ■'■ •-•^'■:' - - 
' S0I1T V iooocfjsa iSS^ .XXI 8X ««sJ V aniggiH .*Xaqau/es*; npn 

""^ nXlTxiO V ^BtiuU i^as ,XXI 83 ^iQiiaH v tsn-ruT ipSf^. j,^XI„^X 

10'^ .5^3 OYO *>£ ;X8€ .XXI 08 ,eXd«i^ V aalooO iSSS, .XXJ Ta 

^eXq Xx:losq^ £ 10^ Yd-jtaasosii lo afo^X airfd" enoejaei jipj-y^^d-e 

aV .iiaXO V n>emiad-j3W,©d-on -b no d-iiia £ 0* ^iqqs. oJ ton aoiase 

' Y'lu^ 8ff;t rioxriw moil ©onsJbivs on ajsv; sierlrf s£ JuS «8S^ ♦XXI 

iJns.KsaTudQiii 10 aeoirasa lol «u;ii ^fnjs iijgXO .eiM wqXXb JbXjJoo 

noitoiXT*enl srii- lo ^nlvl-^ srli .noJbgnJsJ .eiM lo tmJOQjos cio 

tXi/oria noi^fOiJTtanl ©rfT .JnBXIeqq-s cui^n' *on JbXfc artat t&d,i^Si.l 

•■■ i, . '- '.. ■■ 

• Bonsfclv? 8r':f leXnu elrfj- oJb ton IjXx/oo viufc arft J^«41 i5l£e svx-.ri 

srf-' >o 83(jBt sr v;slv Silt nl .agJt^lbijsXq silt lefriiy/ lo XjjBeteni 
eouJboitni iSKziiRi ot einXljal serf isnxs afaaXO .aiM lo eonetxvs 
lol JbsXjnVqxs ixsri srfa ^gnlritYfije lo ,t«£fw gniworfe eonstivs \a.z 

SIC tnjsXleqqjs'^cf- ^eugUB enoiteewp i9rito arft ,noX)an£j .eiM 
'rr.p 0+ ^-^ '+ -r^.,-A.^^r- /e8Rjjoal£^ scf ton Jbsi&n Jfcnr XjslastfimmX 



hi3 wife 3aid in tr.at conversation. "7; find no rsv^rsible 
error in the record, and the judgment is taers-for- affir.'ned. 



o;? Lei.J*-,i ..." .... ^eitu: ctii'j .y.ii hu . 

iJi-psi £■ ' ii.::-tx. 'id .fceuc ..I : ao doidr nc 
->nJ:6.:T3 Kit.'-.:,: it.jT..'-. >.ici • gnii.ljje5v '■ 

c.'ni-:io lis^ r.c.'-^c.- . •- :o ni elcfj'-^tx o:f 9LdGj U' 

£ ft.* ?I .fTnj:-'o."?i.--7:f -to #o-:itnoc axjj. en'.. -■ > 

';-:■* zfoi."!-'' no £!c ^'o arijeTJ- erf* di t'- . - .....--.- 

*nr;: i^' nno -illf ^.-a ,_-. ■ v *c .i2t.s.;o :: 

":>«':- -^ -- '■ ■ -t.-i-^ nl rfcia/. 

to^^r V ., . . . ,.. ,ilT 8i ,esJ 

'• "7 V5T'J.0'M Jt>3* .ill 3c »'-' 

s' ,. .. i. -.0 v rjiicae;}-^''.?. »."ton jc no .■ 
\i'Jt -'* no'r'i- ■v.Qz'i Qous'-lva on ■-• 
r!*- - .v c&niVi.vc! Tol nuJE ^n^ ^..•. 

i .:,. ". c 3:1 iv I'. ':.-' ,ac- • 

r. ■' 'c aV' • -^^ • ♦; .V a. ,; ;\I . 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. l' ^^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clei'k of the Appellate Court. 



-.'' m-jH ?ir!'t ■+<) T.rpK)?! hnc ,?.r':)f_»i!l f "In fltfjrl ■i!\:i iu u/i'iiifcivi InioM 



•(e;-?)'?' '>rM rr; 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT 
,Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State o^ Illinois: 

Present -- The Hon. JOHN M. NIEiif\US, Presiding Justice 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice 
Hon. DORPvANCE DIBELL, Justice 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk 

E, M. DAVIS, Sheriff 

A 



DO 1»A„S®1 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: On April 14, 
A. D. 1916, the Opinion of the Court was filed in the Clerk's 
office of said Court, in the words and figures following, viz 



Gen. ilo. 60."5. ' Ag. Ko. 1, 

2LISAB-TH PC'0L::R, ) 

) 

Appellant, ) 

) 
PlIHT 4 30I7THITICX. ) 

Appellee. ) 



CAHM3, J. 

In June or July, 1904, the appellant, Elizabeth 

iccl^-r, Whs i"-iin<5 ^r. j. publla ■.ilrh..iy .■'-.. Y-r i. - f !r: 
a h'^r'.e drrmi ca-^rl.g*.. The horse l.e?a.ne frightened ty 
an t-.pproe.ch1nr autonoblle driven by the appellee, Pliny C. 
Southwlolc, ind appellant waa throvm fn^m the oerrlage and 
■•rloualy inJ^ired. July 6, 19C5, ?hc began this action 
to recover for that Injury and filed a declaration charging 
only oonuion law negligence in careleBsly nxid. negllger.tly 
running and perutlng the autoEcblle upon a public .hlghv^ay. 
On February 27, 1907, abe filed two additional oounte to 
the dtolaratjon declaring upon the act of 1903 to Regulate 
Speed of Autoaobllee ( Kurd's Rev.Stats. 1902, Chap. 121, 
far. £69a ) It waa provided In that act In section one 

that an auto mo tile ohcv.ll r. ; t ^e dr'ren alftng any xoad •T 
highway faster than fifteen miles per hour; in section two 
that when a horse driven upon the road became frightened 
by the apprcaoh of an automobile the driver should bring 
the nttohine to a full stoj,; and In section four that in 
an action for daraages proof of the rlolation of either of 



544 

oourt and appellet answers that neither one of aaid ad- 
ditional counte has any place in the legal oonalderatlon 
of thle oaeej that there la but one count of the declara- 
tion before U8 and that la the first, or original oojzmon 
lew ootrnt, beoanse he saye the oounta were filed more than 
two years and a half after the ce-uae of aotlon aocrued and 
after a oonnt charging oomaon law aegllgenoe hod been filed 
as the declaration in the case; and alao that the act of 
1903, under which the two additional counts were drawn and 
filed, was repealed expressly and by revision without a 
saTlng clause by the act of 1907, and therefore the right 
of recovery for yiolation of the former act was lost tj 
Its repeal* 

Appellee raised the firat question in the trial court 
by the plea of the statute of limitations and obtained there 
an adverse decision, vhlob he does not here question by 
filing a cross error. We do not see how it can be said 

to be before us for decision. Our supreme and apneiiant 
courts hiive many times disposed of similar gixeitione on the 
mere statement that no cross error was filed,, often without 
any dlsoussionor oltatloa of authorities, but in PelofUse t 
Slaughter, 241 111. ei5,2t4, the purpose of the statutory 
asslgnmerrt of cross error and consequence of falling to 
observe it is fully discussed with citation of many au- 
thor it let. The court said- * If one party appeals the 
opposite party will be considered atf aoqnleaolng in all 
rulings cf the trial oourt, unless his objections thereto 
are presented Im ■$>■• proper manner," and points oat 



k -3- 



545 

the iido«88ity of a8i-:lgnlng cross •rror ±£x cases whar« a party 
does not desire a reversal of a decree or judgment. In ad- 
dition to the authorities there cited see St owe 11 t Spencer, 
190 111. 463; Provart T. Harris, 150 111. 40j The people t 
Sholem, 29B 111. 203; Iteyer. T Meyer, 247 111. 536; City of 
Hillsboro T Sraseel, 249 111. 190; Jorciia ▼.Brown, 251 111. 
301; Village of Shuinway t Leturno, 226 111. 601. But 
whether appellee was at the time of the Judgment entitled to 
vsoorer on proof or adalselon of the facts nliegad in either 
or both of the two additional oounts it jpavlM^ naterial. 
WMXe the trial oourt hald than good on damrrar and also aa 
against a plea of the statute of linitationa, still if thara 
was no statutory law making the conduct complained of aotion- 
abla thay may stazid as immaterial allegatloaa of faot upon 
whioh a Judgment nould not ha entered. 

The Motor Tehlole aot of 1907 was no doaht intended aa 
a roTlslon of the act of 1908. It rapeated in section 12 
taction 2 of the former aot, and suhstitutad for section 8 
different ragulationt as to speed at whlxsh a motor rehiole 
might ba lawfully driven on a pnhlio highway. It in express 
terns repealed the aot of 1903 with no saTl&g olause. Later 
la 1911 an aot on the same aubjeot was passed ( J A ▲. Statt. 
Par 1801, •% •4q)whlofc tha oourt hold in Paopla t Sargant, 
264 111. 614, was Intended to aupercade all previous lagltla- 
tioB on that aabjaot. That aot contained a saving olaute, 
and it is not contended that It affects amy questiom arising 



-4- 



540 • 

In thla oas*. Tb« quAstloB le wh«ther Hft«r th* r«peal 
of th« aot of 1903 a plaintiff maj r«ooT«r luidar tha pro- 
Tialona of that aot in a suit bagun before the repeal for 
an Injurj tuBtalned while the aot was In full foro«« fhl* 
qtieetloB Inrolrea the oonsldaratlon of many ofliaea of this and 
other utatee on the oonaequenoe of the repeal in different 

wajfl of A atatnta, and on the effeot of the y^roTlalone in 
rtlatloa to rapaala and ••Tlnf of rights of MtloB aoorviaff 
theretofore In chapter 131 of Ofor statutes ( J & 1. Stats* 
Tol* ft. Par. lUOft) Theee questions w^re so thoroughly 
dlsoussed in Merlo r Ooal k Mining Oo., £56 111. 328 and 
the authorities in this and other jurlsdictioas so eztensiye- 
Ij rafleivet that wo need not extend this opinion bj a ropotitlon 
of !ihat Is there said. 9iar reaopns there stated we are of 
the opinion that the ^ot of lSK>y repealing the aot of 190f 
oannot be held to deprive appellant of her oause of action 
under either of the sections of the aot of 1908 relied on In 
the additional oonnts of her doolaratlon. As wo onderotand 
tho law^ we are not permlttod to disregard the two additional 
ooantt or to oonsider whether the court erred in holdiac them 
good against the plea of the statute of limitations. The 
Injurj ooatplained of ocourrod emd the suit to reooTor was 
brought and additional oounts filed before the otatute was 

repealed. The defendant raised the question of the ezlst- 
enoo of the statute and rights aoomllg under it bj deomrrer 
to the additional oaants, and then walrod the dennzrer by 
pleading to the counts » and no question is is^Bii hers as to 
ths aotion of the o our t in ororruling the deoarrer or sus- 
taining the plea of the ntatuto of lisdtatioias. Wo are of 



-6- 



, 'i 



A .>.. 



^*%f :t''. ■■? 



, ■■.) ^ „.,,■■.,; "^ , , , , 



!>/■; ^ '\ 



;;^, - . A '■ 



547 

th« opinion, aa before expresned, that appellant's right 
of action BurvlTed. tl^e repeal and have not coneidered 
whether the c our t erred In holding the additional cotmti 
good R'alnst the p"" ea of the statute of llmltatlona, 

Appellant also objeote to certain inatruotions that 
they left the' Jury to a etermine the raterialtty of fnote; 
that they did not confine the Inquiry ae to negligence to 
at or near the time aid place of the accident; that they 
left the proposition that the plaintiff muet recover under 
her d eolaratlon, or some count thereof. In douht by the nae 
of ambiguous language. There la aoDe ground for these 
crltlclsma. We conclude that the Judgr.ent cnist be reverisd 
because of what we regard the principal error la Ignoring 
th« two additional coante in the Inatructlons to the Jury, 
and will rot dlsousa in detail other objectlona to the in- 
structions. 

Appellee oroaa ezajslned a material witness by calling 
her at'entlon to teetlrrony that she had given on another 
trial, which was clalFaed to be In conflict with what she 
was there stating, and in his argument to some extent treat- 
ad her answer that " she did not renember*, or something to 
that effect, as equivalent to an admission that sho mads 
those statements, and perhapo was permitted to go. farther on 
that line of argument than he should have done without making 
proof by jway of Impeaohrient that she did on the other trial 
■ make those 8ta+:enents, The rule Is that when a witness 



-•- 



548 

neither dlraotlj admits nor denl«s the aots or deolftratloa, 
as whss he nerely says he does not reoolleota or (lyea an/ 
other ^indirect cmswer not ariotmtlng to an admission, it Is 
competent to the adyersarj to prore the afflntatlTe and nt 
do not understand that without so proTlng the afflrmatiye 
he should be permitted to aaB\une that suoh oontradiotory 
statements hp.d been made by the witness. !fe need not go 
farther into this question as it oan easily he avoided on 
another trial by followlaf the rule permitting proof of 
such statements as above noted. ( Bay t Bell, 24 111. 
444; I.C.R.P.Co., t Wadem 20C 111. §23; Chicago Olty Ry. 
Oo. T Uaithlesdn, SIS 111. e9S. The Jud^rtent Is reversed 
and the oauae renanded* 

RttTeraed and reaanded. 



•T- 



^ 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURt/, 

f 

Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fouif^th day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hi^ndred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the^ State of Illinois: 

/ 

Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presidir/g- Justice. 



Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justic 



J 



f' 20 



Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justii 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerlf^ — w w .-. r yj 



E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
/iPD -, . ■'^he opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit; 



•'iqA aHT 



ixi? h:i£ i .. ::.rx'r f^n,: oiiorf ? sac .. 

a *: I I 1 '' c -/^£. + c 51 fl • 1 ? .' c> i 't 7 ;: r a b .^ ::■ ^ ; 

.y:ord-3trL , c!£kiHAO .,. ... 
. 90 i J' 3 L , JJ S 8. 1 G 



n't beii'j. 3.6W iiuoO yrii lo aoiniqo eat. 

■s9-f:--9f!L bns -BbTCw- ari.t.nx -(J'tx/cO bi.68 lo 



Mfi. Gen. No, 6108 
Michael Dinneen, -^p.-iolleo 

V8 Appsal -"roir. LaSaile. 

City cf Ottawa, appsliant* 

Games, J. 

Mio'liasl Dinneen tha apoellse waa injursd Deoeirber 
39, 1910, by stuping into a hole in n jj-tr.^et ne-r the side- 
walk in the city cxOttawa and 3ue(i-'4he city to r?oovsr for 

ysrdic^-^and judgment lor ;i7ii5.00. 
The city proseoutss thisNs^^peal and relies for rsvsraal 
solely on '-.Lie claim that vhs-,. evidence loes not show either 

neffli.^snce on the/part oi the J^endant or due c?4,re on th-j 
a o / \ 

/ X 

part of the plaintiff. No error is "■•Glaimed in rulin/^e on the 

'v 

svidsnoe,/6r -jivinp; or refusing of insVructions, or as to 



the jyndunt of the verdict if af/^neilee ia i^^ntitlsd to reoovera 
/ AppellcLa was :-.t the ti.ia of the inj'ary a nan about sev- 
enty years old. He had lived in Ottawa a great rrany years 
and had baen, for a number of y^iars, a member of the city 
council, hi a l-.st term of offioe expiring about eight months 
before the accident, a part of the tirre aervii^g aa chairman 
of the atr:st ani alley committee, ?.nd a part of '^.he tinie 
as a member of 'he sidewalk co.Tmittes* 

At the northwest corner of Columbus and Jcliet strssta 
there -.vas a hole, or excavation, near the angle rr-ade by th^- 
aidewalks '.vhere y-ars before a C3.tch basin "cr "-he ae^ver had 
been put in tnere and the hole Isft open. There v/as no 
guard protscting 'he hole. There .vould be little dangor from 
it in 'he daytime. A ;.3destrian ■■/ould not fall into it if 
he kept on tho Sidewalk as he t.irned the right angle to 
cross the street. The accident happened at about rleven 
0* clock of a dark night o Th3 str -et was lark at t'lat plaoe / 



80X8 ,oYi .ns€ .aMx.JtJkfi 

asIXsqqjs . «as8nnia L&j&dtVA 
• sIXjbSjsJ mo'il XjisqqA av 

• JajBXXsqq^ ,j8WJBJcfO lo Y^iO 

-aJbi? axft Ts9n i-sr.ttJ-^ r? «2 sXorf je od-nX QnXq3«*5 ^cf ,0X£_' ,9£ 

XjBeisvei Tol aslXstr bae. Xossq^j^aXild' asi'jjosaoiq ^d-xo sriT 

lerfrf-is Tforfe :fon esoX son bXva^^rf.t *js<;t- mXjsXo exij no ^XeXoB 

$rl:t no sijsc suX io rf-n£tns 'l<gc sxlt lo d-tusV^^^^ no 8on©sXXgsn 

©rfi- no ejsnXXjj-r ni £>9(i!laXo'''ei 1011a oK .\xti:i!tMA srf;f aO J"iJ8q 



o:t ea 10 ,anoxJox;-j>cfsax la -^nXeulei 10 ■j^nXvXis' ib\,©on3XXvs 

J1SV0031 oi LsLit-ii/z &1 ssiXerii^? "iX cfoXXisv sif:f lo *nxjbai£ srict 

-vs:B d-x;ocf£ nBir.£ x'^ulcii srft !lo e.-nXd srfi- *.^ Si;w SLsX-^-e* \ 

eix?SY >cnjeK) d-jsei-^ js £W£:ftO rrX XsvXX Jb^-rl sK .i)Xo ai£s^ ^&ae 

Y*xo eK.+ io isdms!^: £ tjar^cx lo iscfmi/n >2 ioi ,n©£o' b£d Xrijo 

arid-noTi c^^l2i^ j-uocfjs gnXiiqxa aoil'io lo rni&d- rf'e.^X 8irf ,XXonjjoo 

0fiii!iXjsno BsS grrXvise soiX* srfJ lo ti£q £ ,ifn9tXoo£ arid- siolscf 

tmli 9iif ^0 Ji^q js ba::- ,sei';J-Xftia;oo ^fsXXx; Lhjb JseiJa srfd^ lo 

»escf Jim.Toc aJXjswsXXa arft lo iscTmsm js e£' 

£J"ssi:f8 ^aXXoL bm eudmuLoO lo isnioo tasvidfron, sn:f j'A 

•^rfj- ^cf ©Xr.T sXgrfB erf^ :tj>sn ,noi J£Vjpox6 10 ^sXoxl js sjbw sisrf* ' 

fijsri aeV'Ss erit ioi nXa^cf x1o;^j3c x; eiolscf 81jp:y sisilv eiXawsXXe 

on «£->v 8i©dT .nsqo JlsX eXod ©i.'i' Xnjs aisxIJ ni d-jjq need 

.-noTl iegn£X aXd-tXX ecf XXi/ow eisrfT .eXorf sriv' s^-^^osd-oiq Jbi^x/g 

li: i-i oiai XIbI ton tXuor n^i:id-edX)sq A .amXj-Y-eX eri' nX c^X 

oi fllgnfl irigXi axlrf i)!snijj;t ©rf bj? ;IX£waXXA erlt no *qeii sxi 

nevaXs :f£/ocfx *« b&asqq^d iadbtoon QdT .tasiJe axt"J- atoio 



75.,:.-.. ^vf 

A p^aj.l es - was -.valkinp- north en ColUiT.lous street ->nJ. intaniing 
to turn at a right angls 'vnJl c saat r-nd walk or. Joliet 
streato He rristook the plaoe, "nd turned juat bafor^ r aching 
the walk, failin'.;'; into t:\c hole n.nd thsrohy receiving ths in 
jury aompiained of. The ^^o^^-^ '-"^'^^ hard and level at the 
place •/.'here ha turned, -.^nd "-.s thought hs vva3 at ill on the ^valk 
Hs had thsretotcre bsen accuatoxed to .valk to hia hon'.6 in 
thia direction on Coluirbuc 2txzs£t :.\nd Joliet 8tr<^;etQ, but 
had iiabitually used the other iide of the street.) It is 
argued t^.at from' the fact of hid long use of "heoe streets 
he must have known of the excavation and therefore vvae bound 
V to avoid ito This waa a cuestion 'Tcr the jury and their oon- 
/ j elusion that he might not have known it or might, in the 

^~^ exercise o: iu2 care, havs icr gotten it, ahould not he dia- 
j turbsd by U3t> It is urge4 that because of his oonn-3ction 
v.'ith the city council he should h?ve knovvn c" thie iefect, 
and 'hat he i3 suffering irorr; a negjsct of his Otvn .iuty aa 
a member of the council, and ahould not bs heard to complain. 
The fact that his :a3t (ii;ti©9\ vvere ^uch as to ^ivc hiir. knov;- 
ledge and nctics o.^ the co.nditiona of ths street was for the 
jury to consider in J-stermining ..vhsther he was in tne 
exerciae of criir.ary care/ There is no Toundaticn in law or 
reaaon :or an assumption that a .'Uttinber of a ^ity .'jouncil 
niust, at hie peril, leave all ""he streets -an J '.valks o' the 
city in aafe ooniition .vhsn hs retires from office. It ia 
clear that the e-.roavation ivas one that ir. the axcrciae of 
ordinary care ths city ahould have covered OBi Q'un.rded. 
Inpermitting it to rs.rain at that place for' so lonp, ?, time 

<C^ it was gui:ty,of actior^able negligence and charged --ith 
\: notice of the condition, '^lather appellee v,'a3\in the ex^rroi^s 
of ordinary care for hia vm safety was a fair 'qu-ation 



gnltrre^rti lac &Bf>zic. eucfmuxoO no rijTon grtJtil^w a.gy ^■ > ££^g<}* 

j"9lIoL no :itl£W in?^ Jsjss or ^nr eigne irfgla 'ij Jb ntirJ oit 

gaixfofi' a ?Totecf cheuQ ha.i'^ui bcip ,80jsiq sri;t iooi-eirc sH .i&sria 

ttl 9di -gntvisosr ^cfsisxii- tax: sXorf bl-i:t otfal 'QntLl£^1 «ilj5w sri* 

srit j-js levsl tns Lir.ri 6£W injjoas sn'T .1o Jfcenl^Iqmoo ^{liJl; 

3il«w sxL^ no llltB ajBW sri (frfsuorfi ed bcsf ^b9Ct■uJJ sn sienv/ 90£lq 

at 6iTori eirf od" alX^?' oi bexotBuoos nsecf ©ncjloteierfiJ- iisri sH 

tud ^B^eeita istlloTj bn^c ixsztB ajJcfau/XoO xio aottooiib eirfJ- 

ei \*I (♦d'ssaj-a sdi lo &bla r^dio s^rf-, fcseu ,YlIsu:f xdii.; b^d 

eiS3ii& aeerf-' lo aex; gnol aid Id tosl sdi 'moil t&di JbeugiJE 

bciuod 8*w ai^oteasat Lrtjs noxJ^Vxsoxs e4^, 'io pyoni QVBd &aum sd 

-no& lisrii bne K'^sJl an'i lol noxtesyp b B£V/' etdl >il. Liovjs od' / 

eri^t ax ^id'sXi^ lo d-i nwon2[ svm ton ^rfaJtm sil d-jsxit aolBuLo \ 

-Btb acf *on JbXiro^s. til ^9^02x01 s^s^d ^9X&o 9SJb lo ^seioisxs [' 

.. - ,. noidoennoo eld ^o sejjsoscf i-sxit i^aaijj si ;tl .eu; ^^cf isecfaut | 

.^ ,*oo^efc Bldi- I0 nwoiii sv.-rl Jbluoxip 9d Itocwoo x^i° *4* dtlw 

8-8 "z^ur XTwo axxi lo i-oalaan ^ aioi?: gniasllue ei srf *jBif J .Jbnxs 

.nijala.too ot ijT^sri ad ton ixluoxls ^xi^ ^lioauoo erft lo isdmsm £ 

-WQXUf jnin $vi::v ot ae xious stsw /seltwi) ;):aijq aid t&di' t.qeJ. 9d1 

tfdi xol sjBw tsaits 3flj lo exio/iiJbnoo sxlt ,10 soiton Jbnj5 egiisX 

... ©xij- nJt a£7? sr: laxitsxivy gnifcimistsii ni re^ianoc ot ^ixi^ 

10 wjsl at ao£t£basjo1 on si STSrfT \ei£0 TC^J^^-ttTO Ip aelcisxs 

. .Xioouoo iftic £ 'ic ttQcfm??^. ."^^ isd^ s^otiqsaua^& as xot aos£sx 

. ♦xf* "xQ silJBw l;xu^ et99,it6 sxit XXjb ©Vj^eX ,Xiieq etd tjz .tsuiii 

;. ai *I «aolllo moix jisiitai sxl nsdw ctpitiinpo ©^i:a ni ^txc 

ta ©aioisx© ©xft a| i^^xU ©no 6jjw noi^jeyfip?:© ©xft.rf'jaxit tjbsXo 

,. • ' »fc©Jei..'"ix3 ia« Jbeidvoo ayiJxf JfcXjJoxf^ \!tto\9di: .,9isio ^x^attio 

'wastt J5 sflOJt oe'''roi oofiXq t^di ik atsx$i otvJi s^lttimaeqnl ! 

/ ■ \ ■ \ 

dit7^ b^-^rss^ bas eonegiXasn sXtfanol^OJB liix^^tilirg a&v it ^ 

©S1C13XS exft niAjBw- ©©XXeqq* isdJexfW .noljMtnoo dilt lo ©oiton ~y^ 

noiie-^jjo'' i-ljil r e£W Y^s^^e ""-^ e-txf aol ©ruso vMnlJbao, ^o 



for tlie jury, and v^s ars of MiS opinion t'liat '•■hsir conclusion 
waa not oo unreasonable as to permit cither, the trial :;ourt 
or this court to iisturb thsir firding. The judgrr.ent is 
affirmed. 

Affirmsdi: 



noleulonoo iisri+ t£i'& aolntqo sr;-! lo si^ sw i>njB »^ixft »rft lol 

Hi r- .■■«'-. t i i^ 0° •'>-^'-- ^K^ i- &,-■■_;; J" t, -C£ .TS.: 
-TO- lis::' Lnr -^lui, ar<^. loi aoitesi-p r- eaiv. <itd': 

ar..- {ihi .Si-ij Ha>* -V 

t.ii rut ft*ir/ a.; isrf?;. 

er.: : L ■■J r -.i. ,^\ 9cxi.r ^.i 
',•* i- If-' 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. i ^'^^ I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuPPY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certipy that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my ofBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my liand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



L M!.r to -H-x'.\'i .YM'.ri<[ .'> 



.M'jcflii "Mil \\\ fnu.'''i 1' 



.^ a 




AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



C 



(74 

-1 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois; 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justic^'. 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk, 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff 



. .u.tioi. 200 I. A. 3 20 




yyL4-i 1. Y 



\ 



\ / 



u 



\^y 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

APR ] A 101R the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ures 
following, to-wit: 



■QLiLl.loei£ic »ri3- lo ioi'ti-^. --..-• 
.ecrr^ial •^ai^r3S^-^ foUAV''' 



f^ ^ '"i. 



no : J I w - ■?■ , 3 b t:.s wi §' 3 1 . 



Gen. No, 3149 

Richard J. Elsr.aeter, aprjelles 

ve Appeal from S'-ephensori* 

C 
Thomas Tloaksj' , ac:.f Ila^nt « 

Carries, J. . - ' f^/ 

I In NovartlDsr ISlC, the ^op ti ll c O y 'Riohara - J. Bld ' !ia=sLjir — ■ 
purchased irom tae SfciWC3-Liiw*t , — Tnofin i -s- Rooko - yy a r-^iidsnos pro- 
perty in i-he city of Freeport, and in jonsidera-t i en therefor 
conveyed him an equity in an eighty acre tract cf land in 

Michlr;an, and paid him s!'5300.C0, *-rp^iie%; obtained a Icin 
of tha t^SOO.CC "by mort --aging t-:e Frsepcrt prcpsrty. February 
21, 1811, he exscutsd a .varranty ieed of that property to 
■AppellaB4--x or an expressed consideyation of HSOO.OO, This 
deed ivaa nsvsr recorded, and ap-^eite^ teotixied t.iat it was 
executed as a security icr a ^SCCCO obli.-ation incurred for 

him by the a^^^^-iswaJ; . In May 1913, frp^^«i-te's' executed another 

warranty deed of the premiaea, -.vhich .vaa ielivered to -'-he 

-et *-•/,< '^ <- <•■•*- vX 

a.jb o- llant . The consideration expressed in "he deed .va3 .'450C, 
/| • - 

and it rsoited that •':he 2:rantee a-3oumed ?.T?d promised to 
pay mortgage encuToranoes cf ^5300. CO and s*10C.'C reaoectivslv 
Appelloe -^ claim i«-^that thia l-^et conveyance •r'ras .rade in 
_ I pursuance of an oral aljtgre.T.snt that he would convsy the prair- 
(l/y^i iaes to su-^«^:^:«kfi4i and pay him i'40C."0 in money, rad that 



. should assune and pay the mortgage ind3btr;lnes6 



hould a 

to appoiioe ^ the equity in ""hs eighty acre traoi 

two notes of ^-100. 



and convey to ar^ooiioe . 'the equity in ""hs eighty acre tract 

1 of land in Michi-;an and cancel a palloe'Bv, i 

\ and ^;200 respectively, v/hich ar cell ant had discounted at a 

i 
bank; that ht- executed ani deliv- red the deed ^r:d afterwards 

tDudered appellant 1400. but a ' . s-ja lia »t refused to accsot 

the money and refused tc convey the Michigan property, and 

failed or refused to cancel or c:iUBe to be cancelled the t'.vo 

no t e 34 ' ^v hertrupon .i.ppellea br o ugh t fel> i-a— JW.uLt--44i- asAumpai-t-^tfl. 



"-'■-.»,.;... .,,.,^': .3.4, 
-O'xci s>oner)i:£eT: £ ■^Jig4;-jb60ji...-e.js3iq£^-, j-f H » X l. sq[q 'B sn^ fooTi i^sa^fioijjq 

nt tasi lo &os:^'xi aaojs ^ijfisls rtis at ^iJiups cisi tald tsxs'vaoc 

njsol :0 i:sar^*do '.eVl-I-ecr:* .00.00££^ aiM iijcq bns ^n-s^xiIoiM 

^•rJSJLricTa'^ .y^is-Toi^ S'Toqssal erl^ Sni:gii;,*-ioffT ^C OO.OOSSf erl^ lo 

ocf ^i^fisqoicf d'^rfo lo bseli ^{d^a^'ctBw jb fcsd-juosxa en" ,1X81 ,IS 

eidT .OO.OCS^I lo aoiJ^isijisnoo tssB^iqxs n£ lol-^fl^Xisj^ftA 

SJBW d-x d"iJn':)- jbaiixJ'asi- »««fl-««:fsB ba£ ,i3ei5aoosi isvsn sjsw iissJb 

lol iisTTJJoxiJt noid'JSTjiXcfo OO.OOSf js ^ol Y^-^'^^ose -i^ e£ teSisoaxs 

l6rf*ofi£ beiuosxa '©Ml-^-ef^te ,£XeX vxM nl .*a«iX«*€E« srfcf ^cf min' 

erft od- liSisvlXst Bj?vv rfoi:rf7» ,e9BXJ«e'rq sn'i- lo iseL y^"^-ct:tjbw 

.OOS^'i 8jev. £>©si5 9rf-' oi Jbseesiqxe noid-fiTcsiixenoo sriT . ^no X-I - QJoj s 

\-Xsvid-03cesT OO.OOX-t X)nB 00«00£4;$ lo eeon^.To'irjjons sgagd-iom yjBq 

'-.-._., .i^'.vv:....-..,.VH: 

XTX ©Jb/^m a<s7>' 9t/^£^c5^v^oc Je^^I 6xrf:t J^rfJ- -•< mXjEio 6-J-a oXXeqqA 

;fj3rr+ Jbnr ,Y©nom nx C". OO^t mlrf ^fic ba^ ^i««:fi«^i-^ o^ esi. 
aeBat-idetat asjasd-iom SilJ vaq bn2 emjB6£ bluoda UmS±sJt^&' ' 
;to£aJ- strcr Yi-rf3l& 3rf+ ai vd-Xijpa srf.-^ . » eXX - oqnua oJ vsvnoo tn^ , 
• OOX'iJ '10 eeioci ow d- f^Mw-X-i.*-r---c Xscaj3C i^np aa-^iciohM cit basil ^o 

£ ic leiiwooBtL Ijad ttts t ii z'-'^j^- rfolriw ,YX2vid^osq6Si 00S| Ijnjs 

i 

d-ofgoo^ od- fteaju^rsi *.:■ , ;^ucf .OOi^^ d-njsXXeqojB ^e^aJbrisd 

,ifd"raqoTq njBjsirio/V; &:.\-f yQ^^O!^ o^^ Leejjlei tax: ^(Qao^i sad- ' 
erfv JbaXl9on*o ecf od- aeuiic :ro Xacnjec od ijaei/leT ic ijaXijcl 



rscoveY "hSae raa;r'£:et value of .-JflxS ea^ity in the Fresport property 
at the tX%e/j:i/! '.he con7e^ance\i^ May 1913, and had verdiot 

A55aM*ifc*J-5. cls.ir: -ta— that aftijallsg waoin/olvsd in d.3tts 
'and financial c'.i" • icultiea a,r;d h8 V7as endeavoring to aid him 
I and Coi' that pur.'oss took ths desd of ths Fxraport frcperty 
land asauir.sd the iroT^tg-v;; £ indslatsdnsse tl'.sraon that thie -^rsiitor 
might have the hs.iefit of his r'-^ponsibility; that nothing 
was said .".iDout tae ¥." ohi ^-ar. land cr abcut Ic; si loo 'a paying 
him .1-400 at that tirr:e; 'hat he had at otner tiT^ss cfiersd 
to convey the Miohigan property ^or ^-400 and at ona tiniS had 
a desd executed to be i-3liver&5. on payment of that sua, but 
!th3 mon.-^y ■■•:z.u nsver offered hire; that he hcHfl the deed of the 
'Frespcrt oropetty aa a rj:ortgn,T;d and there xas ns/cr any agreement 
■intent cr purcoae that it iihould cpsrats as a conv = y-nce 
jevilencing a b-reain -^nd s-^.ls. Hs '.--iLsai not iery aoooll '? < ? • * ' s- 
I statarr.ent that the rrior deed of J-bru-ary 31 IC^ll, ?ras intended 
as a njortgage, bat insists t"\at it crffratsd -s an satccpel 
I on appull -y e 'to c aira that the latsr deed was to convsy ths 



;> 



.g. 



;itle./ ^^^^ars-s no good ground for 

The jurYsWaro sonr.elied to choose whioh cf the ralically 
conflioting stat^enti. o: i-h-j trsns^.cticn ws.s erititlcd to 
belief. Tach party^ts^&tixiiid to his vsraion oc '■h3 rr,at':er, 
and T/as to so^^ie axtant corroborated by o^'her evidence, and 
facto and circu-n^t.2nos3 prov^. There ."aa an at^5ir.;t to 
impeach appailant as a v;itns&8 b>s^roof that his reputation 
-cr truth I'ld veracity ■k?.s bad, ...r.d ^Htn esses vfsrs introduced 
by him to prove a .<:.c.d r.^putaticn. The irn^rs^chinti evi:'ence 
tahen to ether, -.varianted ':ae ^ury in looking >jdth -ccn^e o 3- 
picicn u;on appellant as a witner-e in hi? o'-vn behaliVTi"-?y 
evidently believed appellee's =tate.T.ent» The trial court Traa 



/"N. 



Ytieqciq t-^bqssTl otii nt \'tfjs(^8 ufti^lo sjjX^v tsi^X^m SC^ ^syooeT 






^iiSQQiq tf'roqesa'5 erC* lo iissi? erf;t ioo^t ssoqiuq i'firf-i-^oi i^nis 

Sflin'u on cf£i;\r iTjcMIicfienoqesi aiti ^o ^ileffatf e:f* sv^rf Jil^iai 

fisisllo ssariw iQrfJo t-e ^^rJ ^d ijoLi. {^itili; tsdi tjs pCi-1 mid 

J&fid 8aIic^ «no J£ fc^J? OP^I ^o"- \;ifTsqoTq n^lffoxM sr't ^{evnoc oJ- 

ij-jjcf ,jiujB J£r:j^ ^o ^asmx^.q no isTsvilsfc acf od- Jbed-x/osxs IjesJb £ 

»o/i.:iffvnQD £ aj3 ©j-jsasqp JbXiforfa *i ;^,srId■ seoqii/q i:o^*n6j-ni 
^#0-»±-re%f^ Yfis^ ^on JfceJBri- sH rPX.^8 iifljs nljag^r-cf jb gnicTo: iva j 
fcsbneu-ni a^sv? ,1X21 IS j^tJiUTcfs'? lo isesfc loiTq srit ijsdi- taom&i£iie 
Laqqoie,9 -j^ a? tst^Tsqo it &edi sJeisni *0Cf ,»j' 2£ 

■ ' ._._.. „_^-^ ■-^---. . r- 

^ -. ^. riw44^»4tXK>a--«-i:rf-r' To'i ijnuois Jboo^~o]3 8C9*=aW \.6Ii■iJ 
'JIx^.oi£^ST ed:t Ito rlo^w Sfooric ot belXaqaioo s*rew j(^:. 

•. ,i6ctd-j5rn sif" Ip noieicv etd of iwi jii'afti^Xi-xeq do£3 .leiXecf 

.ban ,*0ii5Xi:v9 iprfi^o Y;cf Jb»i';'.7. cfOTKi'o dr;;©!; . sew £.fi£ 

Ov tqta^ttjs as Sisw eisrif .OF^voic «•o^Js:^tJuJJO'Iic• i^ns a^fojsl 

ixoirf'xj^^jjqea ei;f :fA. ^cf a£: .^ t«JsIXsq:ia rfojBsqmi 

x>eo«Jb Oid-nx d-j&v.- eaec ,Jbieo' s£K '^Jio^isv tn£ diui^ aol 

*oa&txV9 -. li diiT .floid'£tifqsi 1>^ r: £ ovoTq oi mlri \;cf 

Y:: ' . ■ : : ::o _sj ncioiq 

Qi;/. :i- . . w;5V^iXdo' xjti'ns^-ivs 




of \lie opinion taat tliey 'vers''' '.vithin their :^rcper pro-.-inc'::! 
in so\f ir.ding the facta, and entered judgir.ent on ths verdict 
^e cannot say, from a reading; cf :".:e rsoord, tliat error m).3 
commlttsdVjr either fiaxtjc the jury or court in paseins: ucon 
the facta. 

The ::ourt at the instance of the pl3.intiff, gavs ^he jui'y 
the following instruction:* "Ycu sre inf^trur.tsd t. at if you 
bslisva from a preponderance of all *:''.\s evlioncs, that ths 
plaintiff and defendant entered i-p.to o.n oval a,,.-re=:nent .vhsreby 
th3 plaintiff was tc convey to ^hs do-fsndant a: 1 his int^r^ot 
in the house and lot in question in t]:jio suit, and in ciii + icn 
thereto \vaa tc i:ay the de-'e.r.dant the sura of four hundred dollars 
and in consideration thereof t .eu deTendant afrced tc convey 
to the plainti f a certain eif-;;hty acre tract of land ir 
Michio;an, and if you furt.'.er believe, from a orspcnderance 
of ail the evidence that tr.e plaintiff lif convey the hcu.ss 
and lot in question to the defendant ind in addition thereto 
offered to "rhe defendant the suir. :i four huddred dollars Ics^al 
tender of the United St ■'tea cf Aifierica, and if you further 
believe, from a 'preponderance of all the evidence, that tee 
dsfenda t refuse! tc convey to the plaintiff the said eighty 
acre tract of l^.nd in Michigan and r---fuDed tc accept the said 
euin of four hundred doi-lare, then you -.viil fine the i.-;3ue3 
for the plaintiff and assess the plaintiff's da-nia^^Qs a?:ainat 
ths defendant at sueh aum, if any as ^'ou .ray '::'3lie/e, from 
a preponderance of the evidence, the fair cash r,ar>:5t value 
of plaintiff^ interest in ^aia house -^^^ni let in ths city of 
Freeport, at the time of ojich conveyance thereof, excesdsd 
the 

Tife think this inatructionXcorrg'ctly states the law, and it 
was t.-.e only instruction give^i^n the case exeept as to the 



jporx, ax tne time oi over; 
incumbrance t'ereon." 



^. ,^ / 

\ ■' .- ' , / 

-•; .:^X:7'-V ^•■ V: -tM, r; ;,..,r «ie-i;fii;Oi •IT' .8J0£l Slid 

,. > ifOY 11 :t/j::+ Jbs*cjL/irf-enJ: si^ uoY" -rnoi^otfrtanj: gxiiwoXXol:' sxli- 

Ycf9T9-i>.- .i-nsms 9rt^« X«'xo Hjc o3-nl JbsisiJ-as tf'njstsnslsb ija^ lli^aiBlq 

cf8«T»*iti eid Il£ JqBJbfr?-2Jb arfj- orf- \{8vnoo o:t eaw l^ii^nislq sxU 

nol:J-t&ft^ nt trr^. .tijue Bi:ri;t nx noid-esup ni d-oX Jfcfljs sex/ori 'edrf ai 

a:i:£lIot Jbsitnxrrf ijjo* Ic mxra snJ dnjsiins'isb sriJ ^{£q oJ" 6f>w oJsttsrii- 

;. .-xl hci&L lo Jo«fi-i:l- sttoij \;#aaia ni^J-isc jb i'iiJnijsXq ©riff ot 

sonjBttsJbrrpqeiq is.motj: .sveiXscf isrlJujl 'ao^ ,li X^n^ t^tias^liio'iM. 

SExroff srfit Ysvnoc Itrfc ^litnl^Iq. en't t&Atr eonsljlvs ©#,• Xiailco 

o*ea^rf:^ noxcfxibjs ni fcne i'itjsljns^s.b sxfJ oit xioiJ-ssup nX d-oX isajs 

XjBgsX eieXXoii fceaiJiiurl ixfol lo nuja »rft in&ha.^tl&t , - :.9iel"i.o 

ieri.-!-atfl uo^i 'li Jens , ,j3©Xtsi8A lo •eiJ'Bd-8. JbeJlnU ©iii io" xeX)nQ|- 

.98'* iJ^d-f .eonsJbivs srlct- IXi? lo son£retapqdiq< a mpiS .avsiXstf 

YtrrgXs X>jtre s.-f;}- lii;tniJElq arfcf o;f \:evnoo o* Xseulsi ;f .■^Xa&lst 

jblxsa sr* tqsocv£ Ov+ tsexflisi Xinjp n^jslrioxM. fri_ jb'n^X lo d-ojBii^ saojs 

e«w6aX sriJ txril XXiw xrc; nsi.'" «eiBlxOt tsiXnxffl' Tuol, to itjjs 

i^5nts-9s BBv-Bis:£± £ '-^^XijaXjBlq erl'it «'«•««£ X>fljR llX^nX^Xq ©a'rf lol 

moTcl ,av9ilsd yjerr! uov ajs ^ar li ,ffix;e rici/e d-^ iaj>bni;'i&b srli 

6XfX£v i'e.-^-cjEft-; rfiBjpo iX^al «rf.t ,eo«3tlV^ sri*-.lo soniJisiiaoqe-iq jb 

lo \i lo 9(1^ fii i'oX Jbrr.e sauod blee at fesiatni 8*^111 ^nijsXqlo 

b^ts^oxs tlostsfi't soa^svnoc riol^e lo smid- sdt ^£. ttroqseil 

1 ".nosiexij son^Tdmuoni aril 
it bnt' ^nifiX ailJl- 8'#^«tfi. v;i:fosiTopi^'noxd-Dx'Td-enX Biiii afnirld eW 



P 



form of vsrdict. 

I Appexlant^s contention ia b-ised en hic« version of ^he 

transaction. Af^exirrir;-^ tha.t to be true, hs insista ,+hc.t the 
oaae ahoull have ceen transferred to "-he ohancery side cfthe 

j court for an invsatigaticn thsre as to the a/Tiount of the in- 

I d3bt3dne68 and "^he right of aroells? to rsdsem. Tis endeavored 
during ths trial to hc.ve trs case so tr-.na ' erred. His error ■ 
lisa in tr:3 assumption that his ^^taten^snt of facte must be 

(taken at- true. A vendes 3ued at law for the puroha.g3 pries 
of real estate cannot trarefEr the action to th3 eq-.iity ^i4e 

I of the court by pleading and at-smoting to prove that -^hs 
deed was given as a mortgage unlere he succeeds in establish- 

, ing ths truth of his iitDtsmsnts. 

A query .-riay ooour whsther the irieasure of damages was the 
market value of ■^he equity oonveyed by ar.pslles, or "-"r.e value 
of v/hat acpeilar.t agreed to :7ive and do in c5r!~ideration of 
the conveyance, iricluiing the rr.ar"'St value of ^-':ie Michigan 
land. Thia qusation ie not .liuoh ar^^ued, ".nd ac::eilant sr.ys 
it is not in the ctbs. Hs plead '■hs statute of f-'-auds "."i 
su'-pose -.Tith ths view, ox rheeting; '•he alls-ration -^hat he 
had agreed to convey the Michicran land to :\ppellea. Y!e sup- 
pose that agrserasnt was within th^ statute ^.nd ther^forsv 
unenf oroeabxe . A ^oellar.t treated it as such, f't least he 

refuaed to :jonvsy the land, which, under -^hs .■^.uthority cf 

1 

I Booker v '.Tclf, 195 111. 365, terrr.ir.ated + ne expressed contract 

and p3rn!itted a suit to recover on ?.n irrplied agreement* 
I Evidence was introduced as ':c t";":e rarhet value cf *■': e 
I Freeport property at the tine in question. The opinions, aa 

is usual in such cases, varied; but taken tke tor;3ther the 

evidence suatains the verdict based on that testimony 3.a to 

value 

There is a great amount of special pleading in the record 



\ 



-ni ©rf.t lo JnjL/ofKfi srft ot sjr e-rarfj- noi^Bgltsevnl aa lol ifiijoo ; 
JbsioV£SJbns _sK .mesfcsT oi seXisgq^ lo ^rigli sri:^ trus aasnfisJclsJb 
laTTS elH ,Jb9TT6"ea3T* oa esjso siW ©vjsxI oJ IJBXTt sxfd- gn-l^ut 
8d tsi/m ai'OJsl lo tasme&s&e alrf *£if* coxjqmusejs eri^t ni eail 
soliq ©BJBffoiwg ©rf* Tol wjbI d"jB Jbeire esfcnsv A .si/i* qb n8:^i^;f , 
e^ie TC#i.L'ps srft o:f noitcB acl-t TtelanBTd' rf'onasp dtp * a 3 las i lo I 
©rft tarf^ 6vo:tq oi :^aXiojnG^t£bcts ^atbssLq ^d Jtuoo srf* lo, 
-xfeiXcfaitas fli afcesoojja ad aasLau ©s^gtioai jb a^ nevlg a^w Jbaet 

,dia9mst.B&a eld. lo xl^x/id' sdi snx 
erf* aaw eo3Bm«£> lo arore^ein arfi- larfifsriw xuooo ^«m ^jiSijp A 
auXflv s.-ft TO »eaIIsqqjE! y<^ taifsvnoo x^^^P^ ^^^ .^P ftx/Xfiv ^.^^'t^.t 
4o coit^iatisrtio at oi?- Jbne svls ot fissTSB j-nj8lIeoo£ ^t^ 
aevidvtU srft lo euLsr f&irsan srfv snltuXorri .aonjB^svrrc. — 
ev'.3a taelLs'zic tns ^tsu-gis tioux *on_ b1 aottasup elriT *bci££ 
&v ajbifjctl lo etxj^fjste erf'^ tjaslq aH ..eejpo exit ai ton al ti, 
ad tsd& Tiotts-gsLLs. Sff:^ gni*s5m lo.wslv srfj- ritiw saoqpi/e^ 
-q«B aW .ssilsqq^ ot fcn^X £fJE5^1rioiM 9'5;f vevnoo ot £)99Tsj8 fc^ri 
^"^enplteie/lt i)ni? b&iststa srft rilritlw e^w rf-nsmaa^sje tacit eeoq 
srf ^a£9X JA .rfoxre Sjb ti Jbet^ait U-nfiXIeq^-A .altf^soiolns-":^ 
lo xilrodtirs'. srf-j- T©bru/ »rfoirfw ^ba^i 9tit yavnoc ot Laei/lsi 
tosztnoo Jbeeastqjra arft batjenlmti't ,58£ .XXI 5t2X «lXoV: v iSi'coS 
.*asma3i3i2 JbaiXqarJ: ns no lavooaa ot tiue js i:9t:?i:mi 
, a.'.:f ?o awX^v tairfxcm art* o? a<fi beoisboitni spm soas.-V- 
a^ ,anoinlqo sJT .noitasjup al a.ujtt siij- ta yitiaqoiq tioqesil 
er:.f tedtfpoi mit ntai^t tud {JbaitJBV «8a&£0 rfous al X^nau ei 
ot £- 'j-^DvlfB-^.-*- t> '^ no Ifc3:5 to!:LirV srfi saXi?tajj"c. sofisLivs 

, SijX^v 



> 



and argumnts baaed tl'. sreon Vuit ws '.ir^-re ecma diffioulty 
in follov/inc^, Tho conmon counts ^..n^ ■':he :?;5ner?.3 i:^3U« ?.t6 
part of •^a''. pleadings. So far as we can see all evid^-nos 
in bei^alf of d-fendant taat could have been admittsd under 
any special plea was p-^rmitted to ^o to ths jury* There 
may hrve been error in rsfusing defendant les're to "^ils plsas 
and in sustaining dsmurrsrs to plsas, but as appellant -.■^o.b 
not de'.rivad in the introduotion ci" svidonos, or in th3 in- 
struction to the iury o."^ any legal ri!?;ht to .vhich ha Tvas 
entitled under the facts, ^vs are not inolinsd to discuss t":* 
action of the court in ruling upon special plsas » He w?g not 
injured ar.d should not be heard to complain. (H-^irtrord Fir3 
Ine. Co. V Olcott, 97 111. 43Sj Ha-rieon v Thaokaberry, 34? Ill, 
513, 513; Tokheiin Manufacturing Co. v Stoylss, 143 111. App, 
198) . Findir.:;;; no r-rvsrsible error in the record the iud£tn:ient 
is affirmed 8 

Affir-ffieds 



aoftpfolve" IXje »©8 iBBO ©w ea i^i 08 »8gnJtf>jseIq srf.t ^o *:cBq 

isJbrar Jb©f*lrafcB neecf Vv^ri i>ii;oo d*^.^;}- Joefcne^sJb to tiaged ni 

" ■' ©trsrfT •Y'l^u ®J^-* bJ 03 ot fcs^tlm^sq ajsw aslq Xjslosqs vrue 

■ tJselq ©li?: o.t (jvjssi BrtJsinelsJb artleiilea nl "Toit© aescf ev.erf ^c-^m 

"«JBW *n£ll9qq4a es ivdi ««(JBoiq 0* aieirtifftrftt; ^.linlatEue nl baa 

-nt 6cii -tit 10 ^sofrsJbfv© io noiJou&oiJfljt sri:}- nl fievlrrcsJb *o« 

•JBW srirfoirfW o* irfgli X-sgel ^ffxe to y"ij^£ s^+ 0* noirf-ouiJe . 

"«!* afeuoeii) o* tsniXoni *on ©i« ©'(P ,«*s>J3"i srf^ iBbms b^Ztlina 

*on eew sR ♦tjesXq'X^fosca nocu gniXjurT Hi #*[i:;oo rrolJ'OJB j 

exit feaol^isH) .nijBlqmoo oJ biaed sd" ^on Mi/oria JbriB JbeTir^nii 

,XII e^-S ,\i:aiscf£il05rfT V nosliTBH^jes*' .XXI V8 »;J-!focXO . .?al 

.qqA'.XXI Si<X ,3sli{0*^ V »oO anXix/d-OJeiwiteM mieiiiloT i5I5 ,SX2 

^netca^u^ srft Jbioosi 'srft nX toixs ©Xcfieiavsa on ^nJtXinl'? .(SSX 

"^ * ' .hsmiilljs at 



ci 



-■■■■•■ » ■ 

-,■;■■, ; y i^- + ii .t^^ [ 



*bS!tttttik 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. ( ^^* I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoin,^ is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oflBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand ;md affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 






O^ 



\ 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



/ 



.^"'^' 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon, JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice. 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk, 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. / 







BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
APR 1 4 ^916 the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 

% 
following, to-wit: % 



^1 - : -• r\ : ^_-^ : 



. ;: i J ; 






Gsn. llo. 5176, 

Evalyn Kingman, aopellea 

V9 Ac,:sal from Peoria. 

Louis Kinarnan, appellant. 

Cams 8, J, 

This i2 an appeal from an order cc.rirritting the 'H.cpellant 
Louis T<:in;j^man, to jail for contempt o? court in default cf 
payacjnt of install^nsntis cf temporary alimony thsrstc-ors 
ordered in a suit for 33p-^rr:,t3 .T.ainteranoe begun April 3, 
1913, by liis -yife, Evalyn Kirpinan, ths a'oallee, and from 
tha refiisal of the court to set aside cr modify aiid prior 
crdsr and xtC^uoe ths amount cf pay.T.cnts to bs re^/airsd in 
tiie futurs. 

/?r The partiec wsr^ rrarrisd in Juns 1303. A->p«Alee- filed 
a bill in o:.anc3ry Tcr aeparato rr'^;intenanoe in Sspt^'-Kbar 
1906. The records in taat suit and ts'c collateral n-atters 
were ^efcre this court and opinions filed in October IOCS, 
reported in 150 111. App. 453, 453, 4So. After the xir-al 
detcrmi'/.ation cf thc^^e auita councel aay she ril-^d another 
bill for 3'pp.?.r'it3 iraintsnano:' -.vhioh v/as disrr-isssd by her. 
Than followed the bill in this ca«£ and a petition '"or tem- 
porary alimony. The court after a he'riring on tl-s petition, 
on Nove^Tibsr 13, 1914, ordered a^eliistftt to pay for ^hs 3Upport 
and rr.aintar:anc® of n^>-yial.il i9e durin- the pend ncy of '^he suit 
|;30.00 per week until ths further order of the court. After 
wards May 37, 1915, 'appall** filed a petition alleging 
that oaid weekly payments had been mar.e up to April 34, 1S15 
anj. that none liad cssn rr.adc thereafter, and aaked for a rule 
on a-ep''e^3>»23rfc' to shc^v cause why he should not be attached 
for contempt of jcurt. The rule was entered and s.-<rj«dlan■t^ " ^' 
on June 14, 1915, filed his anev/er stating in rjuch detail 



.8TX3 .oK .nsO 

c^lioa^ moai XssqqA ev 

sJ-nelXaqqa «n£ni^ni3 aiuoJ 

,1, .esrrx^O 
tnfilXsqqj* 9rit gniJiJX'nmoo tsiiio n^s moil X.esqqjB as el slriT 

^o fluc^^b nl tTuoc "to i^metaoo io1 Ltsl oi ^n^ffigniS sii/oJ 

s'solotsisrf-t '{nortiiX."?. ^a^'Toqinst 'lo BtnsKsll&^eal. 1o :tnsnnc£q 

,S XiiqA nu^ea sofli^r^eJrrijerr; ©Ininq'se lol Jlue s nl fcaistio 

rtio7% bnje »09ll*5q';>? &.ac^ ,n«in5?r;ia[ nyXjEvS ,sHY' axxi yd ,£XeX 

^ci:cq fcxre ^--^J^"''^ "^^ acis^ tes o:f tisjoc edi ^o XiiSiilai sif;* 

at bsi impel sd o& ata^:r.x^q lo frujoffije erit soutai £;ns t&tio 

t'gX^'J ■y jjX.: ^^' . A - .SOSX sxijjL nl teliiJSiK stsw aaita^q ariT s>^ 

•xscfmsoqaS ni ecnBnsd-nijpxr etJSTJsqee to? ^fiso-rrsrlc ai XXio' £ 

8T9?t-i3m X^tat^lioo awJ- Jbax tiue drrj- ax et-xoozi sxfT .BOGX 

,9?GX isdoi'cO nl iaXil Qnolflxqo iirrjp d-iuoc stdt aio*ec sasw 

X-pnx'- erit is^l.A .08*' ,SSi; «o3^ .qcA .XXI OeX at bstioqsi 

rsdfone £-?Xil e.-fe y[A& Xasnuoo •*i.u'e gsorid- lo noi*jBi".'l!Etre j-si 

.•rsrr Ycf b^aaliaelb ajsv* xfoirfw 5onjaned"n2£ai sd'rx's^qe loi XXIcf 

-TSd- lo'^ noX;titaq s fcan $8«o airicf ni XXicf srft fcswoXXol nsrlT 

,xroiJ'xJeq 3n+ ao •^atzs^Qd & ■rsi'le ttuoo ?i.'T .YnomiXjB Yix-ioq 

tToqqxre 9n+ toI ^jeq oi' Sm»Hr^^^ fiaaacio i^^XSX ,iX isgiksvoK no 

ftua 9df '!o YOfl £neq srf:* gnXijjt^ piftfi.' fttr'^r^lo aonjenej-nijeas inB 

TSd-^A .d-1000 8c{+ -0 latao xsrf^Tijl srf* XX:*raf :(q£W rsc 00»0S5 

gnl^glXr. noXd'ltsq jS JbaXi^ a^tfi^rcr^^tSXSX ,V£ x-^M stixsw 

3X3X ,i'S XiiqA o:? qu 9fi?fn na^cf Jbarf etnoiPY-eq Y^X^Isaw Jfclfio *sd[i- 

©XwT JE tcol b93t8.5 inr" ,i9^1jsdi9iicf sJbaai nescf ted snon r^:' t ' rrjs 

^a:fo«:';tfl ©cf ifon bXxxorle a.rf ^rfw aax/^o worfs ot 4»««*-t_ . .10 

*:• .'i'Kf '•— — r,"..r.: 69T6.ti3t& ajsT^' 9I1J1 arfT .Jiyor: 'io tqixia^noo lol 



h-3 pecuniary coniition ■\nd inability to :rake '■hs rsqairrd 
payments « Eriafly atated, it a.-peari :rroni the ans-i^er -md 
the 2Vid3noa that at the tiaia thi ordsr for tamporary alimory 
waa ents ;od apti^l4*i%%> wae in receipt o" ?. salary of i^lCCO.OC 
per ysicr from tue Kingman Plo'v Ccrapany, and a sa.lary of ClCCO.OO 
per year aa a trusts© yndsr the I-^.st will and testarrnt of 
his father, Uartin Kingman, deoeasedj and ^'.-at it .vas ufon 
ths basia of "tnat income that the or:;'sr tc pay |3C.C0 per 
week v/ae antsiedj that hs then had no other source ci incorre 
and no prcoerty excsct hie in-erest in tho estate of his 
father; that the ettats had "oeaorr.© r,:uch involved in aeot 
and fi>-:an:ial dif licultiea j that tr.3 trustees of the sstats 
and iV.zmoBxz of the Kingman family had cesn ccrr.::elled to ns- 
£;ctiat8 ".'ith crsditore and arrange the affairs aoTS'that tc 



their dictation) ths.t ^ ftp a ;;i an t .vas obliged to rslinquish 
his two salaries and Join '/ith '■h© other ir-smbsra cf hia 
family in incurring personal obli_-ation-a for the pay.Tent of 
the debts, and that 'he -.vhol-j family .vera in a struggle tc 
preaerve the Kingxan estate from destruction; *hat he had 
no .-nec.ns of coir.plyin^ .-;i th tns order, and th'::rsfcr3 had not 
ir^ade the required payii-.ents . H--. aaked ^'"hat the rule a^^air.st 
him b-- discahrged and prayed that the answer bs 'ahen as 
a petition and that the oourt should vacate T.nd set asile 
or niodify the order there-' of ore entered, or at least reduce 
the axcunt of such pay:-. :;nta to oe -nade in the future. The 
court, on a hearing of evidence, r/hich is preser-vsd in the 
record, entered an order July 13, 1915 (jompatin:~ the --veekly 
pay.T.ents to the tiTiS of the order) finding ap^;=llant .11330.00 
in arrears ani orderin'-^ that h^ po,y that amount, -;hich ap- 
pellant failing to do ne was held guilty cf contempt cf court 
and ordered conimi-tted to the county ^ail for the tsrrr. cf 
thirty d-.ys "and ui-:til he be discharged by due process of 
law" or released on complianoe -.vith the order from -.vhioh 









00.0001^ '^o \;ijslj3e JB ^c Jqlsosa ni asn ^itoJIoV - q s i>9-.is*ns a^iv 

00,0001$ Ic '{liJliss x' taf? ^ynfiqinoO v.oll n^msnlS erlj-' md't^ Tt-fee*^ ^sq 

lo in-;tiBta9i tar. Xliw j-arl srfd" lebrni ssJauiJ «; a^a laa.Y 'leq 

no:u 8J3W li rf-«r[-t Jbxifi jJbea'fisQei; »njBmsfii;X fli*x£M ^aaili'^^ aid 

Tsq OO.OSi x-sq o* 19110 ©iJJ *MSii^ ©raocni i^rif to ajtsso' ^rli 

3«oorrl la satjjoe x^tito on ijjsrf aerl* eri 4&di jibaisd'as a^^w iasw 

eirf iO ait^J-se Drfjf ai ^8®73;ni aid j-qaoxs ^^Jasqorrq on £>nj8 

tdeiJ al h&vloYCii dosj'.n ^s&Qosd h^d stjsi^as axlc^ *jsrf;f ^is4*sl 

~ea. o^ iielXsqJBOc nssd b^d x^im^l a^&m-^iiil adi lo aaecfms.-n tfis 
oi- l*j3>:amos azi^'ilB sn'j- sgn^ia^e 5-Ojs a.ioJ-l^eTO xfj-iy/ 9d^js|*03 

airi lo aiscTmsffi 3;sni-o.. en't rfj-lv; fllot Jba^ aeitjsl^e owj eiri 

lo ^nsir.Yijq erii ic^ eaotfs^lLdo X^noaisq ^alizuorA ai ^I2ai£x 

. od" elssi/iJe B ni: ©is> ^lifrtei -iodv edi tzd^ ■ ba£ M^^tdlBb pdi 

bsd sri tsd& J^otd■pu^c^B9i) m.OTl e.Jfjsd^as fljB,i:3ni3I erft evTSBSiq 

^on tfrf eaolsTor:^ tn^. ,adi:ao sno rfrflw gnivIq-Tioo ^o eazzir. on 

•*eniB3J" aXutt or.'J *j6rf ■ JbsiiajE aH .ai«3.iiYi?q Jcsiiiifpei sn'd- eLfior 

ej? ns:(J8^ ».cf aewaxifi ©xi* d'arfl^ £)©\j£xq i.fr£ -i>sa^j8paXij sd mjtri 

«i:2aj? {fea fino nv+£0.ev tXaorfe d-ix/oo drfd- t^di fyOA ciolflieq £ 

»oiJts>'t farsL t£ 10 jb»'i9'i-aa 9to1o^ eiBd^- -i^biQ 9Ai \ttboK to 

»n'T .©li/j-ii"! z:dt ni a£j«nr ©6 od., tjJ-as.uii.^q doua lo ;fni/0flJJ5 srlJ- 

eri^ it ijavieae-iq si rloxrfw ^aonatlva lo anii^srf >e no ,-tai;oo 

\;X:i{C3W fiffd ^inJtituqaioo) SXSX ^SI .^ilwli -lafcio cjs tisiactne tiJioosi: 

00,0<;t:^ *nfliXs^:;qc sniLnil (laJbic srfl lo aa:Jt;^.QiIJ od- aifne.c^^q 

-qjB il£i:dr ^irttroau? *jBri*JCj^q srI tf^wit, gniisJbio Lfi£ e i.'s e 1 1^ nl 

J, 
■tijuot; ':: Jqaiotnoo ?:o ^^Xiwjs ijXsn e^ew •tl oi* oi •ggi^XiJS'i ^.^^-i^-^SQ 

^0 TTta* »rft Tol JU^-t Y**^^'^ *-* P'^ bQttXT.scoo JboteJbio Jbnjs 



order this appeal is proeecutsd. \ J-1— - " 

The cour* refused -to act O" the petition to molify thf? 
order p rareatly on the thsory that appsllar.t had no atanding 
to ask any reliai" -vhil-s he stcod in contetnpt for failure to 
comply '.vith "he ord&r to pay tlje past due alimony. 
'^^-' iki'j'i o ^z-^v^ o^ thffse ":>«trtie© reoi.t-?.a In oux*- 
OpiJiiefts oet'ore r^fsrrs'J to appears or <r-fey ^^^^e tr^A r ly 7 1^ f qjxs^^ 
from~-tire r^eoord before ue» Lt'artin Kin-t'Tran '.vas ^\ man of re- 
puted grsat wealth, who died in 1S04. Ks carried life insurance 
from ^vhich ao-pellant fct a coiiGiderabie sum shcrtly after 
hia father's death. A >pej:xant had ether pr-'.^erty at %\% ii 
that tirr.e which he had quite likely acquired bec-.use of hia 
connection -.vith a ^'sal'hy family. He hr.d an Ircome derived 
from aalariea paid him as ^n officer of the di '^'.''^rr'^nt com- 
panies in '-vhich his father was int "-rested. The father's 
property wae placed in trust and there waa au^poaed to be 
a larje amount coming to ap^-lXant at 'he termination o" the 
trust, Decembsr 19, 19^4, At the tine o'~ "^heir '-arriage 
y ;3 b pp e l l^« supposed that appellaat was ~ v=ry wealthy j.an, ■ nd 
hs with a -parent reason, believed that he //as. T'^sy each had 
extravagant t-.stes and the available funds of aoKiellant -.vers 
soon diaeipated. The trust e-;t'te left by !.'cr' in ICir-n-an bs- 
o-'-rr.e involved in j.:bt '?.nd z"i;^q.ncial di '■"•Ticulties, and passed 
largely under ^h3 control cf crs-Jitors* Whether '"he Ki-^gman 
net estate is cf any value cannot no^v be aefinitely str-ted, 
but there is no "luestion taat it is in a condition that 
ev ery p^rty int'.restad in it as beneficiary or creditor must 
be diligent in its preservation. Under sunh conditions 
salaried officera .vhoae servicer can bs dispensed ."ith are 
net permitted to ncdl their o^'fices and draw their salaries. 
^a_jixe o:f't-rr0 op ini un ^h^t-'arrpftl Ian t wf^s not deprived of hie 
salary .aad^a^ans of supptrTttrrg' -hirne^lf ■:w^d- M^ -rify from any-— — 



• tstirosaoiq ei I^sqCjjs nidi istro 
grrifcaste on tjsri tn«IIsq:qB j-jsrld- ^toarf* ^sffd- no ■^Unei^qq- lefcio 

♦ Afnomllja sui;- tBisq ©fit >f«q o^ Tebio srft ri*x\v ^ilqtnoo 
^rfiri" ^r^^ ^«^t^rntT g fi rtTfr I ' l ii ff 1 r"|_ i ' t'i''' i f 1 -' i f "'n''f"TV i 

-©1 \o njsm i' ajsv/ i^jr nm, r-fti r fh"*« i f^ lU ii » iintr i f f 1 1 1 i i o iiit mnxl . 
sojmx/enl s^ll bstitst eH .^091 ai bsit orfw .riJXjssw d-asig l)3*i/q 

Biri ^0 eetf.roed Jberrlupojs yiLB:itL 9*iirp fc«ff sri rfoifftr errrit Jjsri* 

JbevlTSij sjnocrri ru? bM sH .Y-tlatsl Yrf*Jt>B3iv jb dtlr' aot&csnr^oc 

-fflpo S'fTfr'xs'^^lt^ 9'if-t lo •tsoi"''- ^"^ p- 'ttirf Jblsq eeia^ljsa moil 

6*tsd't's^ sHT ,b9ts9ietni. =.-.,.. x-.-lj'jsl alrl dDirfw ni seinjsq 

scf ot bsaoq'nrB esw etsrfvt bets teui^ tii 6eoMq bbw xtiBdotc 

©£ft 10 nottsrrtttnsf sfft ^jb itfrran-rvygje Qf gnimoo tnuomjs spijsX 6 

«SSiiiJC-rT tcxsjrf+ '?;o sml* arft tk • .MSX ,ex iscfmsosa ttsuicf 

tas «nJS.Tj y^^-Cp.sw y^«v -^ ea-w ^lai».I.fr^^JB (foarft beeoqqi/s »ejb i&qq ^ s. ^ 

b&d rloBQ YsriT .a^a^i' Bci tstii Leva iX 3d ,noajosa ;fn3i;£0 r diin sri 

sisw <»«<;: ■;6if'<»E ^0 aJbnul sXdQiiBVjB sdi bcts^ ea^a^rj- *nsgav«t^^c© 

-e^ R£,v-^n nl-^i::'!.' y^ *i9X ej-^i'83 tst/ii srfT .fca^i'sqiaai^ iiooe 

jbaaeeq in/* ,aoX + Xtfci:'•^if^ Xjpiorti»all fcnn Jcfsfc ni tavXovni ameo 

njsrra'-ijj sr.:' i&nJeffW^JkaTod-ltsro to Xoi^noo etf+ TeJb-ai; vX©rj:tj»X 

tbt&p.te ^L^itat^eb scf iRon Jona^o auX^v ^xie lo al ad^jstes tea 

jBjftf noltitnoo js ni et it ts:.df noiteajjr on ei etBcl:^ fu6 

ti=:jjm roitt^io to ti-eioilsned" ejs ti ni Jbei'aei.'vtai Y^'^S Y^s vs 

enoitiJbrroo rfi^jje lehnU .noitfr-vieeeiq ad"! ni J-noglXii; ad 

errr d*i'»? JfcaansqEib ed n^o eaoiviee seoxfw atteoi'ixO JbeiarXaa 

',»**T?!f •^•B fi^f* n-jstrpfc M»r eeoi'i-'o tiai-fd' IJborf oi b-^ttlmt^q toa 

' > -' f ■rf'r'l* . t*T - '^"1- f * ~-rj? » M , . > .ir" .1 . Mil ■i.h ^n 0.1ft, ^f 

■ ». t^ - - ■ ' ' t I II I 11 1 I mrrr^r-.-n F>rr » lr«rAr*B ^ 



-e tlre y - f. ai ^s^itirrrte^tftrs-SHft^A^ xctijra*. Bo far as th^ rscord 
sh.cv/3 t::ate are no ohiiirsn "ocrn cf ■^lis rrarriags and i- the 
present :;onii^ion of the JCingman c.^tate it is not only rrcpsr 
"but very u^^ceaaary that octh of S13 oartisa to tJia tbia liti- 
gation ohouli iearn to live in a much ^eas sxpan-jive rranner 
than was antioipated at ths tiice of the .^larriage or nscea- 
sary zvzn at the tiice that t'vs oraar '"or te corary alimony 
v/a3 entire!. While ;^:^C.CO a ,reek is no aoubt a very moderate 
allowraice fov the ■vife of a wealthy -lian and ■'.ay :-;ave been 
proper for the wife of a man '.vith an income of ^''2000.00 a 
year and no other property, though it ia beyond ,vhat 
io uauaily givsn under . uch eireuiTiatancee, it should not 
"be expected froin a inan of no property and no incom© strug- 
gling to ^ave a large estate from financial disaater. The 
wife is entitled to the allcwarice beeauae she ie the -vife 
and eharee the fcrt'ones of her huijoand, and :;he ia under 
'-^.3 ariuoh duty to fit herbsif to Oiianging circaTBtanoea as is 
the husoand* On the r^ccri oefcre the court an allo-.^xncs of 
|:5.0C a week -vas aufficient under mis t en sxiating circa"!- 
stanoee. The ruj.e ii, tuat the allowance should be T.ade -.vith 
a view to t.ie inocmc of the husband, and \vhen it n-ill result 
in diminiahing the satate from -.vhich the income is derived 
it will not ordinarily be permit Led xo extend beyond providing 
for the actual v/ante^ind necessities of the v.-ife. (Harding v 
Harding, 1-^-i 111. 5C3;- Harding v Raiding, 13C 111. 481, 5b2.) 
The^e is no question that ':he order for alirfiony ia under 
the siSRiiXEi Qorritant control and super via ion of ""he court 
and iiiay be changed from time to lims as con:Iltiona c' an?;:s. 
In Welthy v Welthy 1S5 Iil. o^o. Cole v Cole, 143 111. IS and 
authcrities there cited, and in cany cthar Illinois cases 
the power cf the courb to control and change orders entered 



sfich '^i fcn^ s^^liijsm drit lo nxod xie-^iilirio on si-p alfii-'d eworfe 
TSgoiq yXttO itC'ft al ti &t£&&s njsMgnxl add- lo 'iKyiolij'noc d-n: 

•sannism evfeneqxe eesl rfdi/m jb nJt Wl! oi- nijs©! ijluoris flo.'. . 
-eaoeft TO ■*§JE3i"cii5> a^Vl'::^ lb Smi'd' ©ifd- Ja i>©J^qioira£ esvi n^rfi^ 

sJ«isJbom Y1SV B *cfx/dJb o«u..,jiu .#.!«»«» *» 00. Ot,:;^ sXlrfW .l)©T3fffi- 

rfescf svBd ^ij;^ Jbne iiBffi '^rfiX^ew * l%©j:i;. o1 eortowolli* 

^ OO'.OOOS'I; 1o SBiooni njs rf#'lw n^m ^ lb ©llw 3x1 J- iol'Teqoir 
'' '' 'if£ri>9 i>ffOY9<i s-t *± rfgifOiid ,Yif^9<3C<S "is^^o on .bna 
' >Ofi tlx/oifs *i tsson^^sittyoiio rfou>. leinu nevig y-^Xjsu^. 
-gij-ij-e etnooni ort bn^ Yd-^eqoiq on lo n«ai £ moxl J&eVosqxs oo 

eliw erfj ex srie eajj^osd. ©onfiwoiXa 9fii^, o^ i)©I 

si ei5 BSon^JeictJOTio gni:sn.?,nb o* iXssisrflll bif! "^'jjjl: xfcu- 
1:0 ©orfjpwoXX^s as. ^fijjoo «4* sxolc -r'srflfitO •Jbrrj. 

-rrx'otrxo •^sitte^txB «©; * © rf.f xsZiIijj rffleioi^lx;© eiw' afesw « vC.5^ 
if*iw ©JbBro acf X)ii/orf6 ©ort.swoXli5' ©irft 3-ifff &i eiui srfT .aeonijite 
^Xi/sai IXit? rll fl»jrfw .IrxB .fcn^'tfeblf srfJ lo ©moonl ©ri'd- dH- wsiv £ 
Jb©v2iai3 ei ©wooni srfd- ffolilw aioxl sd-^jO© ' ©xlit' gJn'ixlaxxilmlJb n± 
SnitivOTo fcriOY^cf JijtTs^Sc^ oa .D3d- + imieq ©cf ^Xta^nliiao *on XXlw' J-i' 
V gffici£H) »©l:J:w' sd? xo ©©ijieaeosix Jbrii^ai-aev; IJBiJi^0J8 
(.£S2,X3f> .III 08X ,gnibiJBH v gnliitjisfe' •;B3a .XXI %%l ^-^alL-x&ll 
tebnu fel \jnofljlX^ lol i©i>to srf^ ^jsrlv nbli-aoxrp on ai ©larfT 
iftuoo srf- "io noialvi©qji;e bnis XoxJabo' i'njBd-enbo iaxk^tax 9r:,t 
«s-3rr/; ©nol^IIvftoo a^ amij oi ©mi* moil JbegruBiio ©cf \£m bm 
baB ex .XII SM ,©XoO V ©loO »S€c; .XXl 861 v^jflsW v ^xl^XeW nl 
i.'.j-o BionlXII irsrid-o ^j^ttotttQrii- asXiliodtuJi 



for payment of permanent aliinony is recognized ani ii3ju;33d. 
and with 30.tis except -ons that need not oc noted hcie, it 1,3 
se':tled law that 'cl.e court may, Trom -l-irs to -"lira, iraks 3Uoh 
orders as '.'hi exi'jsnsies of t-S oaae rsquirs. Ts aesur.e that 
while it is true tnat appellant ia noA^ sarning no salary 
a:^d haa no income 'ind is d2V,. ting hia snergiss ^o "•"ne preser- 
vation o- tas rZin.~;nan a state with the hops of snablin^i hi:n- 
3elf in the futxa-e to ha/e a ccnoj-israhie property and snjoy 
a Dubitantial iacouie, y-at t..at he ie a ir.an of suf .:icisnt ability 
so that he can in soi.-.e vvay earn 3c.r:sthin3- for ti-.e eucport 
of hi;r.ijelf and his wife. It is cc -3 pretJUi.'.sd tnat 3h5 ia an 
intelligent v/o;';ian ■..-ith soma capacity to contriDute scrnething 
to her O'vn aucpcrt. Shi ir.u.st at _cast in this period of 
financial miafcrtune .;;ako cacrificss t/_a.t are recpairsd cf ail 
people unisr ^uch conJitionas. Apps^iar.t .'.ad paid tr^e install. 
msnte of aliinony jaD April 34, 1215. Hs filed his anavvsr 
and' petition for a modification cf Xhs craer J-une 14, 1915. 
There was than a'cout c^ven -.-v-vekii or ^l^iC-OO of payrenta in 
default. Uiiether the court should hava rsleivea appellant 
from the a? pay.rient of ii'iotallmsnts dug before he asked for 
relief pr-BSenta a c„.etition *hat v/e .fill no": jeoide bec.uss 
the amount ia probably '.within 'hz poTver of appellan" to r.set 
vilthin eo:rie reaac able tirce in the future, but we ^re cf 
the opinion that the court should hav^ reduced future pay- 
:r;6nte from q;'iC.CC a v.'sek to <5.CC a ".veek troffi and after 
June xtf 1215, the date cf tl:s application for suhh reduction. 
lie are 2.^.00 of the opinion that the record aces not ;iL;stify 
the order cormiittins: appellant for contempt cf court for 
f?^ilure to ;r.ake the deferred payr.snts. That oner ia r^verasd 
and the cause reiv.andea with directions to modify the orier 
for temporary alimony ao tuat appellant is required tc pay 



si ii ,S'i5rf ijsd'on so d-on fissrt Jjerirf- anoI^Qeoxa smop riitrvr Jbnjs 

rfcUE s-rfBcn t©!rfJt* o.-i- emit moi^ ,'^JBm :}"rjuoo-&rf^^*j!5il#^-ir£jt-l;«Id-^8a 

if^rid- saryseis eW .e-iii-fpei sfijso si:# lo eeicrtst-ix^ ©fid '-tjft eisJbio 

■ - YIjbXjbs ofT 2nirf'iJB& won si iasLisqcr^ istii- &u^t ai iti. aliriw 

-isesiq srif o* etJtgasfle exri gfti^-vet ei M\s: amooni on ejeri £»ap 

Yo^ne rar x^t^ior^, el€f£i9i>j;efioo .a evjsrf od- »TEJjd-iji-*K:f'nx' 4ise 

^d-cXidjs d'.asxox ■. !ii;e 1o n^ni js si srf irB:::t d-e^ ,6."t(Ooai L^lfnsisdue s 

d-ioqque Sri* iiol' gnldd'effios nuss ^sw artioa ni .ciJso-sri'^Bril oa 

a*i 6i srfe d-JBxi* JbeiUi/feSTq ecf ot ai d'l .sli-yi* sin E/fi£ IXseiaiisfVio 

Sfrirftamoe s+ixcTxTd^iToo o* ^d^io^eqxio emoa rid'iw «.amow i-nsgiXlsdni 

' :r-.^*^i^ ,j^Q2isf]; slri* fli tajssi d->K ;ta^.'<t s>rfS Aiociqae /iwo xarf od- 

XXjsIo i)»^ix/p©'£ dijfe ^^^^^d• ettOili-Si-Be 8ij£;i, ai-ii/;t"ioifiilii5 Xisxonfiaii 

.XXfid-Brii ©rl* X>iJ5q i>jsff ^nMli§q9:k wtkiio it ibnoo dou a %9bim eXqosq 

^leweaB sirf Lsli'i sH *3X6X ji'S XXiqA cut Y;nomXX« lo e^nsm 

i'aiex i^X snx;!, asijio srfl xo xroi*BOilii3oai .a ^ol noxifid-eq Ijnjs 

ni aJftsT^Jeq 1o OO.O^X,^ to eisf-w nsvea djjoo'a nerfd^ S£w siariT 

• • d-«jBlX9pqjB h9visX»T ©vjhM jbXwofIa ^1000 ©xl* •ysri^sriW-.^XjajslaJb 
tox ijeiejE arf aiotscf axft ad-nsmXXjeteni' io ^nsrn^jeq bjji srfy moil 

■' •' *8i/»69d ©.fclsst *ofi Xfiw ew itjBff* noiit'asijp £ ed-nseeiq IsiXsi 
^e9:T od- itasfXsqaje To 'iswoq srf! nXrid-iw ^^Xcf^sdoiq ei d.iJJOftiB eii::^ 

lo sii? aw tx/cf ,9'iir*x/'!f edi ai s;iixd- sXd^aosjBSi smoe rtixfd-iw 
-7JBq 9ix/dij"i JbaoiitM sv^ri tlxroria dixioc sdi *i3d;f noinXqo erid- 

i9t\B tns moil jfeaw & 00.S4 od' issw jb G0.0S$ moil aJns.v 

♦ noid-oufcei riiix/e lo^ noid-JsoiXqq^ Sil^ ^o 8*jBib eil<f. »ai3i «*X snxrL 

^'iijj'su^ jofi B9oi fcio&9t srld" *jsrfd- noixriqo 9rfi^ lo Oi=. '£ st3 aW 

•■ tol: Jfiiioo 1-3 d-qmedffoo lal !^^AXX*gqJ8 gfltiJt'iflt.iTOo lerio ©:':'■ 

fcsea©v5«t si teJoTO t&i-'T *(|{^«tsii!l|f«q ii««aft«Jt arf#- -WismVot axuXip-i 

«fcTO «rf* t%lJboa 0* •xtoi rf*iv.' bebttamoi ee&t^o ©ffJ in^ 

X«q od- beitupd's ai ^n»XX^ oa ^nofriXx^ >fijBioqmsiJ' tol 



cnly C5«"^0 a -jyeek from ani aftsr June 14, 1915. The enforcs- 
ment ol bhs paya'.ent of ':he amounta here indicated must depend 
upon conJitions hereafter ariaing from which the ability of 
a,pp£liant to pay may ce bhor/n and asosrtained. 

Reversed and ^■•sinanded V7ith dirscticna. 



-eeiolne eilt .6X81 ,^I anul, isJ-^je £ni2 moa!t iasw jb 00.6$ Ylrto 

tnecab J-suft fc«*jecxl>fix sTerf sJnuorrua srf^^^o d-nsm^BC sri* 16 d-naar 

''%o ^*il j;cf£ 8i^.t dciriw moil §iiJ:ei"i.<3 isil^^sted anoxititnoo nocu 

~' ' .- ' jic---.5a!? ix:i ^r.l} ■:V!il a. 
■ 1' -iit*-"..- "... i-;ro . f-.:,; A':i." %i-sJ»i a 

- -. j-.t; " :;> - .y xc: -.•.-tit -•'•:^£ /.ueti X'BV d.'.fcirf '.;i 
;.■• 6- t^.a -:a..'' b&.:J:.i-z\ £. ■.' o^ -'. *I .3li;v ^i.'i . 

t;>i'.'8r:- --iff ^ifi'. aH .■:i2i , J-.t.' XJti ;A .'i;? 

: 'I.*, io --._,• - .'V.{';- i j •» S; . 3:. *■ "i' 

■ - . -^ ■ .' -■ - ■iwo:; cfi flii:i-tiY> y 
•v' ■•.••-*■ ,'^" :.':"., e.Tl.^ t.i >r.ii « 
* / , ; • ', :: .c: : .' <-.vr ; wXoorie Hwo^ /. > 

' ■• I .,..'""■ -)«»'-i!» .V .'C'f jt issw jj 

.J • . : .::: . ,; r?:.- Vj 3. 

. -•; ; •. ) • ;t,c'*^ ^ : ■ Jef = it 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) _ 

SECOND DISTRICT. \ ^^" I. CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY. Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in ni}- office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my luind and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine Ivaudred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



■rtj -S, 



.•-ioitiu ,' 



A o 



/ r' 



/ 



J ( 



A 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M, NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice, 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Just'iice. 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justjice 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 









G 





/v 




\ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
(^/i/fj-, I <i , / Cf ( \ the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ures 



following-, to-wit: 



\ / 



Gen. Nc. olS3. 

Mc-tthovv Eonag'aue, 'appellee 

vs Appeal xrcni LaS-^.lle. 

Edward J. Fr&ikin, appellants 
CarnsG, J, . jL^^^"^ 

. iji^ Uatthew Donaghue, the apc-e-lle^, was riding along a 
public highvray north of Ottawa juet after dark July I", 1G09 
drivinf; a eingle horse attached to a top buggy* He ':v?.3 in 
a ber^ten path a llttls to "-.hs aiie of thvO canter c.'" +he road 
becauaft the center had b--.n recently 'jraded. As he kvaa p:;-s- 
aing tha prs^niaes of Ed-Mard J. Fraikin, the ap^el-iarn*-, his 
bug;e;y r3A7 ovsr a oow lining in tha road and «;aa ovsr^-urnsd. 
. Aoyell e» (j was injursd -^uits asrioualy, b'-ith bones o: hie ankle 
vjsre broksn, - a cijmpound, comrcinuted fracture. He was con- 
fined to his house for a Ion?; time suffering conGiderabl'- 
pain and incurring acniidarabls expense 'or icotors' ■rills. 
His injurica -.ra to ^0^: extsnt permanent. Hs broug^it thia 
action tc r: cover for ■';hat injury -ini had verjict^nd judg- 
ment for $5 0. 00« from -.vhich iudgre-ent the defendant -appeals. — • 
The i5iUS3 of fact were atatsd to the jury at '•he instance 
of the defendF.nt is the relieving inatruction:- 

"Ths court instructs che jury th.'vt before tbey can find 
the defendant guilty, theymust believe, from a prsponjsrancs 
of the evidence, 

First, that the plaintiff received the injuries complained 
of by him by havin;^ his but^--,,y upset or overturned by a co\v 
lyin::; in the public highv/ay: 

Second, that the plaintiif himself ^^as not ruilty o J" a 
■.vant of ordinary care for his c vn safetyt 
Third, that the defendant .vae the owner of sail cottj 
Fourth, that the defendant carelsooly, negligently cr unla-vfully 



.sIIjF-SflJ tnoTl: IjssqqA ev 

SCSI .-i' Y-i^J^"^ 2fiJ9Jb -isJ-lvE? tsul aw^.tj-0 -o rlct-i^n v-swrf^in' oildi/q 
i>£Oi sn+ 'o i&rf-nso oil:? "io acle sff-" 07 ©Xc^J-xX £ rf^jS": no^ised ^ 



.i>snTJj;tisvo sja'." bnjs ii^oi effc^ ni sai^X woe a isvc xmt ^ra5,iid 

©X;(n.e exrf -o esaocf diod ,\fXsjJOirrse s-itiijf Jb£*iiJi;nl e.g^'v i^X£e" ; . ' A . 

"HOC a^v/ sl-l .siJjtojiT'i betuntTitsoo ,fcnj;/oqm^c £ - ,ns3loicf 2iew 

»Xcf£T9i;iar;oc gniisllijjs smiJ 300! £ tcI eeifori airi o.t baiiil 

• eXilc 'a10C^ooi: 10: sensqxe eXcfJS"isi)ienoc -gatiiuoal hn.e xi-t£q 

eiri;t ^rfs^'oid sH .ifnsfijsrnisq ;fnstx9 srcoa oi eip e$liulat sXH 

-g^jLfj; Jbrt5d"olciev i^jsa' tnr \^iL^t^i d-jsrl:^ 10I isvooti ot noi:fO£ 

•~~.-»X^»-:t^-Jt-jtxijSX^.34.sX;-^-a4i^-4 g9!t ?3 li tH' Avld^ t moil ' »00 .033 10: ^nsm 

-rrroicfoiJiteni gciwDXXol sdi- nt instrxQlst sal lo 

son^rrsiaoqeiq £ moi'a ,9vaXX3d JeumYsa;; ^^tlt^g tarbcislsb arfJ- 

,eonsLxve -i.'.^ lo 
Lsnl^XqfflOO Bstiu'iai snt JbsvisosT 13-itnljBXq sdS tsdi ^taill 

woo s Y<^ tenii/j-ievo to Jeeqjj ^{^■3JJcf aixf grrXvjBff vcf tcin' \di !to 

:Y.ev,Tfsixf cxXcfuq srit ax •^.cilxl 
A 'c Y*'-^-^^'? ■+0-'i *^*" ^Xesffllri lll;tnljEXq srfd tr^di ,£>noo93 

•^^eOzs nwo airl 10I sijbo y^-S'^-^-^o ^0 ;tn£W 



permitted aaii oov? to run ?.t large on said public highvrayj 
and , * , 

Fifth, t-iat the. injury to tlie plaintiff w-^.a ona r/hich an 
ordinary prtlident psrson saoula have forsaken ■-.rouid likely 
ha open as a oonaaqvisnoa of perir.i'': ting a cow to run at lar?e 
on a public highway, r...::;i ur.ls.,^ thi. jury find irom t)ie evi- 
dence that the plaintiff has proved sach cf said reqrdre'iCnta 
by a prspcndcjxanoe of the evidence, tho jury should find 
the defendant net ;^uiity." 

--5feere can bs little contrcve'xay t':a>«;bhe evidence 3U3 
tainS^ af firniativs findin^.s on the firijt and s3Cond proposi- 
ticna. Thsrt -.".'aa a decided confliot ox avi::-enoa ^.s to 'he 
third -.vhsthsr the defendant waa tne c-vner of Vne cow. The 
evidcnc3 3hov;sd t'.»at a,:»»>wllBrr%' had anxriiber of jd'.vs kept on 
his pr£ir.i£ee; that at diffsrant tirnss bsrcre t.:e accident 
thsy had b2cn p^.sturid in f.iz road* On' vvitnasa t. at appeared 
at ths soens c: tna aocidsnt i.r.i e. iatGi.y aftsr it happened 

testii'icd that thsrs kxk T?ers two Q^i'Ta in tna j'oad tlier-, that 

■'■ -'■'•.I,. -■!■' ■ *v.'--* 
he had before seen in apfieiiaftt *-* herd. The doctor that was 

called to the pis.ce ^iaid that a^ffiy iimH then and there said 

he felt sorry to think it iias hie cov; tliat v/as t"'© cauac cf 

*-■■- ^ yJ 
eipf>dll€'eJ-*« brsakinr; nie leg. it v/as ao dark ' "lat appeil*«„ " 

did not identify the covr at the tiire o:"" the acci^'ent, but 
he teetified that hs had a converiation ..ith ap-?yen^AnV atf ax 
afterwards in__ -.vhich apg^e-l-iewft* told aiw that after taking- 
hiru,/a€: , nor.:© that night he saw t>.'o of hic; oo.vs coming 
dc'.rn the road fro;-a the north. ^This xestiT.ony was sufficient 
if believed by the jury, to support an affirffiative answer 
to the third propcait-cn. It ia t^ue that the evidence intro- 
duced by appellant Indicj'ted very strongly that hia cc/.'S ere 
in the enclosure that night and that it must have been soire - 



*t.' <' 



jY-BwrTsirf oXIdJuq ti^-? no S^^JSl *r xui'T Oj woo lii^e Ls.^fd-lmaeq 

Hi; ricjtrir ena Bi^w ^Vi tnljsXq axfi* ibd" Yii/f;ni add t^rLJ, ^dtxil 

YlaafiX Jblyov/ nosesac'i svjGxi ijXi/'orle. xioeneq iJ-iisM^Q ,^;:ianjtjbtsa 

e^TJsI J^s HJJT o:t woo js grrig cMajiaq lo sortsx^psenoo at .eja /laqojSffi 

-iv? arid' moi'i £snll Y^^t ^li* -as«'Ifitt; Jinsi .^^iJi'^d-gtd ollosjq £ ao 

Btns.r.Btisspei btsa 'lo rfoas isavo/iq &J3d lllitaijalq au^-, d-jsrid- soasi^ 

Jbfli> fcXi;/oxla ttw^ ®'^^ *©Oiio^ive ^dC •lotv'^IOQ^^&Otxioqsiq = ^cf 



'* erfT .woo srii- lo lenv^OcSfi* ©JEW drxfibaalsJb e£f«* ::tsrfs^9rfTSfc,*-X5J(;i£t4 
■fro d-qsi e*foo lo Isdfk/rtjB Jbari •#*»i-i*«9»« #«iid-:-i;»W9^^ 
' "rf-nsJbico* Slid- eiolecf fiemid- j-jneaalStjttijJa {J-^rfrf- jseeiaieic siri 
£6Tr£eocjs ifjsalf aaen^iw nO *i3JBoi: sri* nl Jbs5u||i^q,;C[5Scr Ijbc: x$i^* 

tscTf fii^dt Jb^oi efiM ai ewop_ owJ ci&w Msm.ti&d^ fii^d4 ^elXlt^&t 

■ i)i£fe sT9rI:f bn£ nsui- >! ■ ]»£ ■ I j tj^^s d-arid^- dbljBft. .. ©OfiXc^i-jAiii";: o#.|)sXXjso 
lo saJJJBO arid e-uw tf-lBrid" woe- std:. b&x ft ialdt- oi' w:3i%o& il 

x»a» •^fwsTxt^t*'. rid-xw fioi:;^j3si3Vfio.o & h&d eif *jJM3yt,^fe©^li*e»d' sd 

w ■ 

Sftinioo a*oo aid to owt wj8« Sii JtI'^Xh J-^jjid- araoii ,i^«^«.e(5:.t*\taji;jci 

drtSicXliir* axw \:icimiteii7 aiifl'^niij-'xoxi adlit :.W^i ^^O'i .>L 

'3«Worii-»vld'i6ri»Ti1:tj3 oa #xo<Jq^8iO;^i4X1i/j; ©rfd" ^^ ijjjV^i^?- 1-t 

-o-xJ-ni ©o£f.3£iV3 Biii''^^di euxdr.'Si .,#1 isOtoiJlttOdjq-xq ,&i^t.oS|f? 9* 

-eEO« fi^'?:'::' svari ♦•/jrrj ii tfArfi iiiU; ct'iigifi ;f,Siid- diwsoXo^^a ©i/i ni 



body's else cow that oocasior.ed -^ne injury. Put -ve ?.re oatia- 
flsd that '"h3 3vi:ven33 3u;;'-'.'i ji^ntly icaErant supports the 
jury's fi;-iaing th:-t it V7a3 appellant's cow to .To bi:' th« trial 
court or this court diaturbin? that !'inding« ^e think th- 
jury .vsre warrantsl in. ans^vering the x-ourth proposition in 
th3 af f ir.aative. Aopsllant's ooun=.'l tried th3 c.?.89, aa 
indicated 'oy that preposition, on the thsory cf caass isciisd 
ur.dsr ths act prior !:o tae present act (j. & A. Statutss, Chap. 
0, S3C.1, Par. 332.) holding that a domestic aniT.al that has 
93oap9d Troni its enclosurs v.'itnout the owner's fault ia not 
running at large, and they argue th-^ case hers ao though the 
prasent statute, vrhioh is 3on:e77hat changed in ita terms, did 
not change thr: rule in those oases. It is said by appellee 
that decisions under the prior statute are not applicable. 
17ithout ieoidin- that question we v;ill assume that t'-ey ?.rs, 
and that ii::ding an anir.al on a public high'^vay, unle:;^ the 
owner kn. singly or negligently permita it to be at laro-e, 
doo3 not -rake a case cT negligence. 0. & M, R. V.'. Co. v Jones 
63. 111. 473; Myers v Lape, 101 111. fio-p,, 183; Moro-an v The 
People 103 111. App. 357. Under ':hat vie:; c' the law, which 
appellant is responsible x"or in this cs.aa, the court properly 
permitted proof of ths custom of appellant pern'.l':ting his 
dorrestlo ani.alB to run in tne highv/ay, and that they had 
been seen there unattended at other times shortly before 
the accident as bearing on the question of his kno'.vl5dge and 
care. While there was a conflict of the evidence on this point 
we think it sustains the finding that appellant negligently 
knowingly and unlawfully psrn:itted the cow to tun at iarge 
at that tiiie and place. The fifth propoaition was not sus- 
ceptible of dir ct rroof or opinion evidence. , It '."as a 
matter for the jury to determine from their kno.rledge of 
co.r.ffion aff'iirs. TJe are entirely satisfied <7ith their con- 



-sltsie 9T.e 97' iuS .^lultil »rfr*- bsnoiejsooo i^c'.f woo aele b*x^o6 

©rfd ei-aoqqire irjiBarxaw Y-C:faei;oi'ili;6 soneiivs ed* Ji'.^t Z)8ll 

I-'o T* erft Mcf ol o;t woo e'tn^IIeqq^ aj3W il t-3d& ^atbntl e'^^^C 

»rf:t Diffirij sT^ .gniLni!. ^srii gnlcfiu^iiB 'Jii/oo airfd- io' *ijjoc 

fii noitxBoqotrq dtrusoi B(ii gnixsweris Hi'issd-nBtcajBw 'sisv. 

e.s ,98.eo sri^ Jbeiii- X-^m/oo a'^njolIaqqA .svid-jBnxill 

battoet aeB£o lo ^troeri^ eac^ no ^noid'xeoqo'i \c^ ts^jiolhr.'! 

,.q^0 «»»*0*£i-8 .A :& ."L) ifo^ i'npesiq Vii&' 6d' ioiiq ^oe -:. jj 

ifon ex ^fXifrlJ: a'^sfiwo sric* ^-jjoriifxv? ©ocireblons eji moii ieqjBoee 

srfJ' rigjjod*-. «« «»:c©rf siko ©rfit ' ©xisii ' ijsJtivt i>£tB ' jegi^i ' Jia gnlnrti/T: 

jbil> tBmzt&. Q-ti. ai ij^sofiffo Jadwsaioe" a'i" rfolxlw ted-i/rf-iji-e ?n:eaeiq 

sellsqq* ^o' i'-t-f'S ai jfl .888*0 esoJid''al sli;n"'9ff;f safl^rfb Jon 

.olrfBOllqqjg d"on exe •*i/*J5*e ioiT:q^*rf*' iefcnjj anoxeiosi 
.SI.-? ^9f.i tsd;^ emx/esj3 Iliw 9W noltesxjp itjsrij gniixosi T 

©ff* eeelnw ^^-STrrfglrf otiduci s. no lamina n^ gnlthil i&fJ Jboe 

i; •- =• ^,j^ -•■'■■■•,,;.■,■■■" ,- ,' ■ J , , - - . 

*• * - ■,...,.. . . V ..J ..... . ., J. I..,. J ,,. :„ . . 

,9SiJ5l ia q6 oJ S-x B^iffiisq Y-t^nssilgsn to ^l^Qalvrcni isnwo 

Qsnol* V .oO .W .H ,M &" »0 .©onss-iXgen: iV ssjso « safxirr. d-on eso'Jb 

9ifT V njs^-roM ;S8X .qqA *J^iX lOS. t.9,<Jfi'i v VieYM ;S^> ".XX'i .Sci' 

rioirfw ,w£l erft'l^o. rosiv .il'jsn.ric; is£}nU '.T2S ."qqA .XXI £0X eXqos*! 

YXisqoiq Jijjoo add' ,de-6o axxfii- cii lol sXcfianoqet-a si j-n^XXsqqjss 

Bid ■sattflmreq tfnjsXIeqqjs Ho moiauo idf lo lobrtq 'Jb©*#i»aeo 

■ = -■ ■ ■ ■ ■ :■ ■ ^ ■ ■ ■ ' ■■ ■ . ^ ■ ■.''-ii-<) ■ ,,, 

•ttoSiao'' xitiode aemXiJ ledio &£ beta&ii^mi 6*iafi* nese nsso 

bae tsJbeXroftjf aid lo noiitesju. — gal^iBScf a£ ^nefrlooa erfi 

^tnioq axKiJ- no ©onsJblve ©rff lo ;to s^w s-^. 

^Xta9?§iXsen tn^lLQqqs Jjsn'cr gn^Jbnil 8xf;t enl^d-aue ■*! ^aidf sw 

©gt^i j-^ nirl of woo edJ let^ixiQq YXIw'iwsJtnix £nxi vX^nlwornf 

-SI/8 toa a&n ttoiiiBoqoiq xlJlil ©xfT *.'©0J3Xq bae 

JB a^w #1 . . soici-ivr .iuir.i.'o io looiq^o-aiJb lo ©Xcfij-qso 

^0 ©s- J'x'i ©nitciejsi: o* X'^'. -^^ 

-aoo ri&cij d&ir fcellaxtf'xse "{iorit. b^ .BTlrxljB noaixoo 



elusion tliat a cow permitted to rur. at large en a public 
hlghvray in ':he night tiins should bs reasonably e::^cectaa to 
lie dc'.vn ir. the road .and becoir.3 a danjsr and ;renace to 
travel. 

A::pellant complains of the instructions to the j'ory 
In plaintiff's -i-an inetructions t::s jury w-sre in"crrr.sd in 
substance that actionable lUTgligance v7ould ari&-5 frcx ':he 
defendant's "nsgliirsntly a,n:l carelessly psrmittirp; hie 
cattl3 to be and r-nain upon -t-:..* ;-;ublic high^veiy in tlie night 
time" at the nlaoe in question. It is said -^hat the .ieolaration 
charTes \'.iful ■-li^condtr; t ard "he instruction •^'^.rrants 
a recovery for rr^^re neglig-jnoe r=nd "':hat "^he inet-uction dees 
not inform the jury That the facts must be to ccnstttL^ite 
cattle runnin>j at lar-re. The inotructicn ^0?^; not r^uch 
differ from the st-^'tftTsnt of ."ho la^ in de '^ -and f.nt' s ingtruc- 
tion above quotsd. Th^ defendant as'c^d -^he court to instruct 
the jury that '^he plaintiff coulf not recover if he "could 
by the ex-jrcise o"' r.'5-^.acn'\b?.6 --d ordinary oarr. h?.Ye ao driven 
hi 3 horae ?.nd bu^jy prior to and at "he tin-e in question 
Sv3 to have avoided tha aaciient." Th? oourt modified the 
instruction by ins'^rting the word ".j^ist" b^^fcre the •.7ork "prior" 
so that the jury's attention was Jir-ctad to "rlia conduct of 
the plaintiff ae hs n'as aoproachinj '"h" co#. W^ 35-: no 
error in thi3 ae applied to the f--^.cts in the casa. There 
w?.3 no rcoa for inquiry -.■h-.thsr the plaintiff -.vas negligent 
in taking that road or ."riving ac-s unrrana^s-fols hcr^)*, or 
sonvcthin.T of -'-hat kini that ;^ight ari39 in a ca99 that trould 
call for an im.uiry as to the plaintiff's co"'3ur;t to- n tirre 
before the acci'snt. The sviionoe showed "-hat the plaintiff 
had drivsn to toy.'n about t'vo hours before the accident and 
had drink a glass of bcsr there. There is co"'^ 3u~;;;e3tion 
in the argument that he may have been intoxicated, though 



oiXcfi/q xi no 9-§.rei ts rri/n o^ £>©;ftlrf!«r©q woo ^ tcrft" noistrlo 

« Ov £s*05:ixe '{Icfj?noa.csT ed Jblx/orie e ml it if ff gin Sfl* ni -^c^rlairi 

r. ^-^ ?. , <• o;t soJsrst tasi legri-elj^s enidoecf Jbni bjsoa sd* -.il .criiroJb eiX 

ri' Y'2W-(; «rf^ 3^ Brtoli-ojjij'aai «ifJ Id efli^aXqaioo trrjellsqiJiA 

i^ ,i?9snTo'?ni: aisw x'^sjI »rf* arioiloi/ttarti nevl^ 'a^l^itnl^Iq nl 

.. .(^.^£f! .T50i^ ?3i:Ti5 Jbluow eoaajiXssn sIcfjsnoifo.B'rf'jBrfi'-abrTjStaduB 

.. ,,. ^^ .. Qiif grtltd-i-Tntsq YlsesXstao bnjs Y-C^-n^gXXgsn*' e' J-n,3fc'rrslat) 

trfain 8fft ni -zm; d-s^Jt A o ilduq sfi-f ^oqu niBrfr*i '5itc 9cf 'cytf- sXtt^o 

noit£7sXoGc ^d:^ ^i*Af btBH Bt -i'^'^tioitasup nl aoisXq'-afft-ifi "smXJ 

- . ad'aPTt.'^w noid-oirtifDnJ: ©rf* brta # cta-brrooeinT Xu^X.-;^ fes^Wo 

; ;.asef> no^cToi/Td-arci srf? t^rfr^j/tR aorifslXgan etcsn! to"^ \risivoooT s 

•^outisal 6 » itnsbffs'! 91: nl w,8X ©^*. ^^■e- '#ii8m«#BlB -«Ift^ moil ' iBlliJb 

JbXifoo" erf li Tisvccsa j-on Miiro© l*l*nljsXd eti*' ^jsri.t ^f1L•^ sriJ 

.aayi^rtfc oa av-sri.ai^o y^^'^-^^o fcn^ »Xcr,'?rro«.p?)5 ^.o sstcttxs Bd^"^d 

ciotteesjp at ami*' adid-x Ijajb o* "xoIt^ Y3:pi;cf Bn^'aaaorleiri 

arf;t bil,^itom ^Ttsoo srfT ".tnatiooJB an't bsctovs avitri: o;f sjs 

"xoi-xq" ^f-xow ©jrf.* ai:ol!?cf "i-ajif' Jbiow arit ■gati'maal ^d noltcx/Td-anl 

■io ioi/brtoo anif a;f Xjetosiib e/sv,' nolJrTs;t;f3 sfYi-i^t »&'& tsirtf oa 

' , oa eee ©W .woe .■■''jct-"'" ^nlrfojsoico.s ai'w erf aje llltrrl^slq- SifJ 

-o^arfT ,eBi?o Bd& nl a*o.-^l ad* of baiXqo^s «£ elrfd- jtI "icniQ 

^ tnen-tXssn: ajnv/ m^rrl^Xq 9A& rBMeifsii ^'tluptti 't(h'^tacoTtvnBst7i 

• ao ^frtfiorr eXcfi<es^r;iJ5i(Yn0 s.voe •QKi'virb to Jbjsoi thjsrft^ "stiii^iT iTi 

JbXx/ov *B-^^ aajBO £ .ti eel7^ Jri^^lm ^Brfit Jtnt:^ tJiti'f Jo r.ntd&vtr.oB 

^ttiti ■^■"■oe ifoufcToo B'^^lifnlfiXq erf? of ejs Y^lupnl rf£f •tol XXro 

.3;^,Iifni£Xq srf^ ^rxfu^ bs>voAe PioaeliW^ QifT^'tttwttvok '^arft eaoltecf 

fcn« ^rrefclcoj? e«f^ aio^ecf ext/od o^cJ &ucc!s ctvio& ct nevlifc fcjcri 

nc/tfcaj^r.^^a *rfos si ararfT .a^sn'* Tssd lo ee>cXg £ alflATcJb l)/3xl 

fi^jjorfif- »l)OiTcixoJal naacf sv^ri yjs;' ©ri t£d&- frfsmugus sricf nl 



very littis ground for such an assumption. Tha modification 
of the instruction lid net r r.clude that inquiry by the 
jury, if, bccc-.u38 hs ••vas intoxicated he had failsd to aea 
the cow he v.oxild not have iesn exercising cars at and just 
before the tirns of xhz accident. Otner instructions 
offered by the dsfsniant vfevs r^jfused. So far as applicable 
they were covered bj? instructions givsn* Tr.e casfc -.'.'as ;:ivsn 
to ths jury unJ.er a fall ^nd f'-iir ^otaten'.ent cf the law, 
ae ciair;;ed by apir-sliant. Finding no error in the record 
the judgment is affirn'.edft. 

Affirraed. 



sea 0* £)£ljti?.x JbBff sn" bet^oixoiiil eavt ed aeucoacf ,li «Y^J^t 
t^ul,. Jba£ is S3£p gniaxoiexe nes<a _^y'6f d^on JdXuow sa" woo exli^ 
..-i ,^.,.... . anoIi-o;/.T*9riiLi8xi^0 .,j,fa$bipy'B,3ii$ lo 9f;2;f sri;^ eicoled 

,....,^,p. Jbioosi exlJ- nl lorie Qfi ^n^i)^,t^ , .i"a48X.l9qq3 jj.cf Xi^ml^Io, a^ 
■sf;«x^i;'^v.T ••: C3.' ■j:?' ^sl'tj ate/?'-' ei?''-** r 

f.Itioo" »'■ li rmciULT: ton bLucri 

\.rr ■-*.■,.:.-■ :',iT "» . . 

^^7?• '' .ftfr »-■♦.: f ct 

.':••■ ^ "•" : U-ic. ' 

.y ^ ■ ^■- r'.:i' -c- I, » ?'• 
. " ./.' ;■ '^ \ ! rt wr« 



STATE OP ILLINOIS, 

SECOND DISTRICT. i ^^" I. CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



^f' ' !■■ i''i]i'i(>(i> •flJ '>o "fii.M ■M.'-t^ I: y'i iinJo^v^K 



219 



/ 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATEI COURT , 



.,•«.'->,• 1 






Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine^ hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of trie State of Illinois; 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Just ice. | 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. 
E. M. 'DAVIS, Sheriff. 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

aPH 1 4 i9ib the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 

following, to-wit: 



.- ....2 biTX-. be r bean snin hai . r .. . 

a X i J I . i . s .;■ j=; 1 5 oil i lo i o i;-ij a i:G ,^ ^i , . . 



no :*iv/-ot 



Gen. No. 6319. 

Jchn D. Ccnr-ors, appellant* 

va Appeal iroir; Co. Ct . 7'ill<i 

Henry Winke, aopslles. 

Carnss, J. , / 

A?>5»«l-l-€k»t John To Connors, and af>i-;>«HQe\ Tienry '."inks, 
'•rers riiing en a public street in the city of Jollat, each 
driving- his o^-n automotiile. Thsy -et at ths intersection ♦ 
of another street ani 'here '.vas t collision in vhich a'^'~i2- "* 
lamt-Mi oar was injured *.to \the extant, h« sa^'^s, of about 
1:310.00 but much 2 a3 aocoriin';-: to ths testimony of a-palles's .Tififc- 
neaaae. He brought thia aotion to rioovs-f for ' .at loss and 
a jury t ial resulted in -i judgrnsnt for 'he dsfsnaant, from 
which this aopsal is prosecuted. 

Ar^p3llant'3 main contention i3 that the vsrdict is net 
su.'portsd by ths evidence. Each of the partisj t'rstified 
on the trial, and ;?iade it quits plain, that he was iriving 
his oar slowly and v;ith care, anJ 'hs cthsr party .vaa :riving 
in a reokless manner anc entirely reaponaibie icr r.he collision. 
Each party was corroboratsd by other vitnossee, and there was, 
as ii usual 'A^ith such accidents, a contrarity of evidence 
a a to -.vhat happened, and r/hsre and T^hy. It is a aur:-)ri9in5; 
trait in human nature that intsllicent, truthful v-itneiaes 
^ill diffsr -viisly in describing 3 t-riTi9action of "^hia ki^-d. 
It will serve no useful pur:.ose to rslate "-he *:s3timony in 
dstail. Appellant citei ssvsral authorities in 3U-port of 
his proposition and hen the weight of svidenoe is clearly 
and maniisotly ■a_ainat the verdict it is the iuty of the 
lower court to grant a nsr, trial, failing in -.'/hich the 
judgment -7111 be riveraed upon appeal. This ia undoubtedly 
the law, but upon an examination of the record we are of 



i^> 



»&n.al£eqqs ,aTontnoO .1 nrioL 

aolfose'i9&ni ©rft d"J2 ^fST- ^s-'^T .»liciomotu£. nvio stii %alviib 
'■i^;^iL :'ioi:riv; nx noieilloo j? sjbv; sieii'.- bns tssitB nsdioaa lo 



tn-B ssoX j.3r ' lol Tsvoosi 0^ noict-o^ eirfj- tci^u&x6 sK .aeeeen 

.bsiisos&oio aJt X^sqqs .airfo rfoiriv: 
*on at tottrev 9rf:t tjorft ei aoliasirtoo alam £ 'd-xiJsIXeqc A 

gniviit a^w sri ifsifJ ,ni£lq s;tli/p ;Ji: sbgip. bns ,Ij5iij^ erfcf no 

^alvit'-. ££?.' 'jcfiiic isricfo arfv true. ,snr.o ri*iw tns ^Xwola r^o siri 

.ncie2IXoo sri.-^ loi eXcfianoqesa >fXeii:*rr9 Jbn^ lennjBm aasiiooi a nt. 

,eJBv eisn'-t trrj? .aeeesn^lv; isdio ^cf £)e;t46iocroTioo eaw ^j-iaq rlofil 

^o^^^ive 'to ^;tlt£ii^noo .s ^Btn^tioo^ xfous liS-l-v X£U6i; si e^ 

■gniei'xqiuB r si ;tl .Yrfi^^ ^n£ rierfw Jbn^ ^fceneqqjErf ^jsxlv.- ct e.i 

sse-snd-iw Xi/tri^tu-rd- ,;J"nsnlXl3tnJi d-jon'o' ©TjJifjRn nrmirri ni it£.it 

•JbcriTf etrf+ Ic noxtossnrTt £ gnicfirroasfc ni Y^^stiw ^sllil; XXiw 

ai xnomttee* eti:^ erf-jslsrt oJ- saoq'xi/q XyleExr on evise XXiw il 

to ifroqqi/e ai Bsi^iioriJ-ur XjSTtsvee csj^io jfnjeXXeqqA .XijeJsJb 

YIij35Xp si sonsJbivs lo jtrigisw srit n9£f tn^ nolJ-ieoqcrc eirf 

9f^^ lo ^Jwi) 9rf:^ ni *i *oii)isv srf.^ ^snijH^x, '^Liij.i;':la£iix\ bns 

sci* doixfw ni gnlXifil ,XBiicf wan ,? Jajsij. ot Jtuoc i3v/oX 

Lnif ai eirfT .Xasqqs no'iw x;©orrav;T so' XXiw ^neitgtjj^ 

\o t^is Sw bioo9t Bdf lo rtoirf'£nimj?x& nc ao<:u iiS<S ,W£X aril 



the opinion f.iat the 'vei.^ht is net ..:l6-.rly '^.r.d ;t?.nif s.-itly 
against thr ^/eight of the sviAonoe, therefore w- woull not 
"ba jUitil'iai in r.:ver'jing t'-:e judgn^ont en th3,t jrouni* 

It 13 arguei that the court eri'ed in '^-mif-tlng 
•>vitn3338s other than experts to t'istlfy on -^he question of 
th£ amount of dairia£e3t '"-; do not seit that that evidenoo, \m3ther 
proper or improper, r.ffsctsd the o.uiation of. liability, tkere- 
xore it ic not rsceasa.ry to disouaa tl^ut paction cf the court. 
It io also urgsd t'-at ^ht :)Ourt erred in admitting photog-rapha 
of the Jtrest '.vhere 'he cocurrenoe ^.r^-paned ^^-ithout sufficient 
proof that thoy ahcA'sd th? ooniiticr, E.t the tim^ cf the acci- 
dent. ?re find ncthing in thit tsstirnony -^hat in cur crinion 
influenced th3 verdict cf ths j ^ry adv^srseiy to appellant. 
Fhotcgiaphs, diagrair-Q snd dra'-vlngs '^rs oft^n prorsr, not as 
evidence within thsn^selves, but for the purpoas cf enabling; 
the jury to undsrata.od "^nd apply the t:^r?tifrony . Rainke v 3anit-.ry 
District, 360 111. 380, 337 ar.d autboritiss thsre cited. 

One of ':he grounds' ufcn vhich a re.r trin.l ivas akaed 

was that cf .':evvly iiscoverad evidence wisxi ^hich //"s largely 

cumulative in its character and Jces not seem to hs much raided 

on by appsllant. Ke only abfrtmct© the affidp.vita as to one 

of the ■-ritne:=Ea9 zri5 saye in +\ie abstract thsra -.vsre siitilar 

affidavits ae to five c'hsr n-itr'&Bses. Nc res-son is '?ivsn 

cr 3u~5e3ted '.".'hy tlie-is witneeees were not produced on "he 

triFtl, thsrf-fcr? the court iid not err in disre-arding those 

affid?.vits. 

uo complaint is made as to -he instructionB tc t>e jury* 
We find no substantial error in the record, thsrofcre the 
judgment is affirrr.sd. 

Judgtrent .Affirmed* 



Ylil'sslla.^.TT bm Slav's©!'.' ton ei fci^iav 9si& d-jBud- noinlqo erlif 

ion Jbli/OTv ---w s7ol9T3n\+ t«one.?:ive sdi lo j-rf^isv? srit Jsnisg^ 

.tnifoij ^£ffc^ no tn9.Tii2l)a(; srfd' gnl8'i©V3i at bQt'it&eul ecf 

Snlitlmi:n ai bs'i'is ^luoc ^x-[r^ tijn;? Jt9iJ3ijp. ex dl 

ao noideeup s.it no Y'^^-i^esd- ot eJ-xscxe n-eriJ isrfdo .aesasadiv,- 

-sieff.t «!{!?■ -tlicf si -i- -o rroltesijp srid- J&8tos'il^ ».isqoiqrai sco laqoTq 
.d-iuoo 3ili" ^0 noitojs tarf* eei/osifc q* •^ij?e^«,o.oii jfan ,.sti *1 eiol 

^nsleillya c^i/orfd•iw J36«sqq£rl; eOjnsi'iuotJQ. ^-i; s'rarlv,- d-aeadie. . sjP*'. 20 

^, -ioo.T arid- lo eaud ©rid- *£ noid-iiinpo srf:^ tswqrie ^fsrid d*j3iIJ-: loottq 

noixxiap, stio nJt d-arfj- ^inotmltBQt *«£fd ni gnirfd-on xmil sW . .tm^i: 

■££. ion ,TS7cTq nsdao e7£ s-gnl^a^b. bttfi 9'm!X:^lb ,S£lqi;Tso.i-oil^ 

SfiiXcfjans- ,^0 e^pqxwq «ri* "m^x .^w.cfj t4«©vX$e.sc?4t xitriiisv soxiferlvs 

Yi.-cflnj35 V ex'nisfl . YnoinJtd'sPd' erid Y"t<i'?J5 i)n* J^n-ejf-easijm; pj^ Y^^t -^-^ 

^.ted'io QiBdi eotttjo(iiu£bn£ , T8£ «08£ .1X1 OSS .j^ottiaia 

^^j^. . JbeeijE bjcw XriTCT w«rr £ ifoifi'w (it^iUJU:: a^m/oiS srijf;: io.i snC 

, YXegijal eavv rfoiriv: isarsr sonstivs teisvooe.ct . YXwoa. lo **!ri;t ajisr 

jbsilsi riouT. s(i ot msoo .ton espt fcnjs Tedoj?; ije.no itit nl ovljfBlJjaix/c 

sno ocf £/? elivjsti^l^ ari* sdOi^i*9dj3 ^jXno on .d-njsIIeqqjB ^cf no 

TiiXlmle S1SW sierft to^ei.J-acfj? srH ni a^f^s fcns. aeasenllw »rf*: lo 

add no teouboi'' d^on dfev^- ssaaandiw e«adt ^riw ijsJssgs^e -lo 
eeorf* ■j^aibts-^sialt at lie don £iit -diiipo ;e4t- .eiol-i^rf^t; ii^tti 

.^iy(; erl^ 0+ 9aotSouTient ed't ot bjb 9bj.m ei crniplqaoo oK 

erid aiolsierft .JbTooi-i s:if at loias Lettas^^Bdus. on bat'i s^ 

• ijemiillA. d'nsmabuL 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ( 

SECOND DISTRICT. i I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFPY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my liand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



6 



^'^!- 



/ ^ it) 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATfe COURT, 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, tpe fourth day of April, 
* in the year of our Lord one thousand ftine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District 6f the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Jug t ice. 



\ Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice 



\ 



^ CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk 



\ 



'%. M. DAVIS, Sheriff, 



T 



\J \J 






BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

"^ 4 lb the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ares 
following-, to-wit: 



.-^^tgijL ^aitias-rq: ,8UAH3IK .M HHC 



rrt CQli": ysw i-ivcO Qcii ■%o noiniqo ariJ" 



Gen. No. 615S 

Ixsnry Fcross, appsllse 

V8 A'~:~5al from Livin-^stor. 

Celeste A. Davis, appellant* 

Niehaua, J, 

In tliia caE3 Henry FcrVea, the appsllea, recovered a 
judgment in tns Circuit Ccurt cf Livinrston County, against 
Csleate A. Davie, appelicLnt for ^'173. -.vhich aiTOunt b-? o^almad 
was due him, as coXiT.i^sicns for -getting the purcho.aer for a 
farm, sonaiating of I7u aorea, vhiah appellant sold. 

Tt Thsrs *i^ a s"-iarp conflict in the evidence ?v3 to the 
tsr.T.a of the. contract u Jon -.vhich the claim Toi- cor.rrisaion 
^■^a based. At>j>sll-e« clai'na that a»->pellant agreed to pay hirn a 
commiivsion oT ^l* ps^ acre for finding her a purchaser; and 
that &he fixed the pries of 'he farm -^c bs sold, at floO ~er 
aorej '-vhile appellant claims, that she agreed to pay the 
coinmisaion /ir-wed, only upon condition that the purchaser 
whom .ap^s-lls^- ^houii find for uer, -vould pay ^he price of 
^130 per acrs; vand t'.at appaidj&e .vae not to have a corr.rr.isaicn 
uj'leaa ^130 per aors v/as paid by such purch?::53r for ti.s fs,rir.» 

The evidancs tends to 3how that the purcho.ser of the 
farm, to -.vhom aweliant finally sold it, for |:135 vet acre 
v;as prooursd ti:rough "ia^, inatruirentality of -apr>€lla«;''^ ohat 
ia to say it ivaa .,app«lt»a- ■\\'ho iaJucad this purchaser to 
viait aopellan* and the farm, '.-ith a view of buying it. One 
of a:^eilant*s defenaee, however, l9 that befcr^ she sold 
the farm to this party .vho finally did purchaae it, a/^e-l-l-ee- ' 
deceived her into oslicvinp- t.at this ourchaser v\'as not one 
which; abfip«^ll**«"nad procured for herj but t-^t fhe hcd brought 
with him the person 7hom he excected to\:rinr about the gale 



S2ia ,oVi .nsO 
e sIXeqqjB ^ascfiol \ia^ 
.ilo^aT^niviJ moil Ire-- A bv 

.d'njsIXsqqjs ,Qivj5G .A siaslo^ 

Jbsml£lc sil J-ruJomje rioirfw .STX'^ aol i-ni3lXeqcjB ^eivjcQ .A sJssIsO 
£ lo'i isajDfrcTjjq erfcf anj£:fi35. lol anoiesim.too a/- .miif sui, 3£W 

8ri* o* Q£ aonstivs st!^ nl ;^cxIj-rtoo qi£f.'a e -^ s'lsn'T T^ 
noieaint.TOc ■to'' mi^Io exft rfciriw aocv ios-iiaoo^^di. lo en-is* 

1©*' OtL't *£ ,£)Xos ecf o■^ misl sri:' io eoliq srij- Jbsxll erie j-^rli- 

aeejEffoiuq 9i-.j d'jsrf.t no2ti:i)noo noqJJ xiao ,Jbsm,?i^ noleai.Tjaioo 

\V' •-'■ -■* ■ V.- 
Ic soi-rc 9ii" Y£q JbXx/o?. ,a9ii ;ro'i; Lnil iiiJoa'e ^ e X.£aqq < ^ morlw 

noiaei.aiT.oc j3 s\-f.n ot ton ejs?. »e '■ r sty^ ^^jsxi J i)nx^ ;8:i0£ aaq OcX^ 

.aiTjs^ Siij lol is6£rioiuq rfoue y<^ iiiz-q aoew sic^ loq OCX> bbsI/jl; 

ar'i- I0 Tee.GrroTJjq ©rfj- ^^ni- worfe oi^bnsii ©cnei-ive srfT 

STO£ Tsq cSX^; "xo"! ,i"l £Ioa 'iLLsall itt nLii rf^ . s moriv; od- »miJ3l 

oi ise-Brfcujq alr::t Jtsoi/Lrl onv.*\6ei-X»«q38\ exw *i Y<e8 o.t ex 






#rfcc-Xffl 

cno ;^ofl ej'w i»8jprfoii/q elrf* ^^.i gnivelXsc' oifnl Ten tiQviDoat 
9lse '"iit &jJon,^ T-nitr'o& Jbstoeqxs on modv. no8:c2q ?ri;? mlrf rfi^iw 



of the farm .'or lier; and '.v?jited her to make a contract v.-ith 
liim in rsfsrence to the T:?vtt3r, 

Ths.a;-,. . _- - ; -isniei^ that h2 made any statersnts to 

V-',. t.j - 4- '-^ 

/ar*>pel i-ewtt to ■:''iat effect; or t'.at he told a pellee t':at this 
purchassr "was not hie man". It oecaiT.e thersfors, a cjueatlon 
of fa,ot Tor the jury to pasou^'On, in connection 'nrith all 
the other cvidsnce in ths case, nnd to ist?ririins XKsi'x '.vhsrs 
the tr.:th of this ni^tter lay. If it 03 a faot, t':.at appslles 
cono£al3d fro:'n a-p»:lant, by a f-i-lae 3tat3r.i£nt, that the person 
'<vho» at that ci:ns, was tryins,' to purchase the farm froin her, 
was a purchaser procursd by him; ani that a^pellse was thseby 
induced to aftervvards aell th^ farm to him, for ls33 that ths 
amount dhe would cther-.vias have exacted, tasn appellee '.vculd 
not hs entitled to recover ooinriisaicns, even though 'he tc2ro:i3 
of the contract v/sre found to bs aa claiaed by hiiXi. (Hafner 
V lie- ron, 135 111. SiS.) 

Inatructicna 7, 8 and 9, -vhich were given for appellee, 
pur.jort to state ths facta that Aould authorisie a riccvary, -ind 
a verfict for appellee; but oorncleteyy ignore ths rr:.atter of 
defense above stated. An Instruction vi'hich pur orts to stats 
all the facts nccesaary to a rccovsry, and ignores ths matter 
of iefense of v;hich there is proof, is erroneou*. (Mocnay v 
City of Chicago 33u 111, ^4; Millar v Cinnamon, 153 111. 447; 
Lee v Quirk, iO 111. 395.) 

For ths error indicated the- ;5udi2{r'ant must be reversed 
and the oauas remanded for another trial* 

Rsvsreei and rsmandedtr 



Bid* i£:ii ae^fetj^* fcloc^ sxl isi:.'';^ to [toslls tBr':i oi >«N »iIocL ->^\ "^ 

iioiwesrp 3 .aioloTsrlj- 9<t.boz6 tlM^ci^tS eld ioa asw" ise.varloiirq 

Il3 rf^lw jfioitoeanoo rri «no:iLre££q o:*' Y^jj^ 6.:f:f -jlOI jJ-OiJl .lo 

e:is.t*- ifl£xx eniaaisist o;J" tap. ^9>%-»o .Qiit, -at, sonelive. ■xartto si;* 

ssXieiiqjB i£r:t ^to&l .<s so dx II .y;*! T9**j*m : sirit ^o xf;tj.;7l arli- 

,rr9fi iuoii iai;8l sx£.^ <^i|jExlc';^i;q ot s^^^?*- - ejsv? ,»n;i;t d;>aiIJ i£. .oav.- 

Y':^Bar{;J ej?w eaXXaqcJB tMii Uis^ J^M Y^f ifeSTCx;oo:£q t9B£xioii;q £ e^w 

©fij Aand aoaX toI i^iif oi majs^ srfJ XX»a 6i;-xawx3i^£ o« Jbesotffcni 

tXjLfov.' aeXIsqqfi ixsrfcf, ..,i)eJ'o.9xe sv^ri delwiarfd^o. JbXwcw ©ffe *njjo.tts 

Brtixs;^ sxl;' ifgwoxy ii9V;&,..,jiAai&s-tffi.iiO0 levoo^i cd" JbeXd^i^jis scf ion 

lenl"^) .miil ifcf tsaiiijsXo ejs ecf od" isnuol saev^ Jo^id-noo eild' lo 

•:•- . :• Sr. .bl-^i. .;c O' a:i^i or' i^ ,:(v»^S -XXI SSX .nO'r^sH v 

»,sXIeqq£ to': ctevig sisw rioidw ,,6. i)n£ Qi.iv^'- unoiifojL/ad-snl 

lo i8«.;t^m etii' szonsi "ijifsiteXqmoo d'jucf jaeXXeqqs «©1 i^l^isv s 

ei£ia oS aiic ruq rioixlw aotioux^^al ak ,tatsie' evodJs esnsleXi 

t©;fjjcm Bif;)- ««ioxisJ; i3«j; .ifisvooai £ oo Yl-eeesoan ec^o^l sdi XXj6 

V YS^oo*^) »e^'06r:o:ti5 ■ 8x «loo"iq £X eiexl" rioidw "io senslsl lo 

;Vi^> .XII 88X .tioosanniO v ?£XXiM ji^X*^ .Xil 9€£ og^olaO io ^fj■iO 

••'!■-;, ;'.^ JL:-^,f (.^«i£ .1X1 0£ tatiluC V esJ 
tesisvei sci invm ^rrsmsjcx/t s^" tei-fioitnl Toiie srfi lo'i 

,.X«J:t- lan'tona ao'i Jb9tnJ8m=.T SEi/Bo 9dt bn£ 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. ( ^^* I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Coui-t in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the AjypeUate Court. 



-) 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



?■ r 



. / 


.^ 







Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second Distric't of thie State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M, NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice. 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerl. CI A A "^ -; ^'5 "^1 



\J - 



E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

' ^- --''^ the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit : 



f « 






no : i - 
: - •' i bn.6 



Gen. ITo. G181. 

THE JOmiSOII OIL RSI^IinCiTG;- ) 

C01IP.AI3Y, ( a corporation) ) 

Appellant, JAppeal from Zaoxj OoTxn.t-j, 

-vc- 



GALESSURG RAILV/AY LIGh^IIIG ) 

&) :i?0i73[R COIIP.illY" , ( a corpora- ) 

tion) , ) 

Appellee, ) 



UIEEA.US, J. 

Till:-:, is a. suit com onced by Griio Jolinson lleflninrj Corapr>ny, 
appellant, against the Galosburg RailTray, Lijjliting a Por/er Conpany, 
appellee, in tlie circiiit court of ~Jjao\7 coiinty, to recover darjiaf^es 
allGgod to havo been siistainecT on aceotmt of a oollic-ion betweon 
a street car operated by appelloo and an o.utomobile truck bolong- 
ing to tlie appellant, appellant clairaing tliat tliG collision r/as 
tlie result of appellee's negliGence, 

/'. Tlie case was tried on the first, second and fifth coiuits 
of th.j declaration. The first count cliarges tOaat tlie dw:y(i^'i3s-irj 
by its agents and servants, at the tirae of the- collinsion, failed 
to liave the stroet ear under pro jor control; • econd c unt 

avers tha aji^all-^je, by its agents and servants, failed to give 
pro")or warning of the apxDroach of the car; and the fifth count 
alleges that a.p.A«llQfi, by its agents and servants, failed to hoop 
a proper watch and look-out as the car approached the intersection 
whore the collision occurred. There was a jury trial, which ro- 
suited in a verdict finding the ag^<el^«-e not guilty. The -es^j-^ 
p^Ilraro made a notion for a now trial, v;hich was denied "Xij the 
court, and judgment was thereupon entered against tlie n^iSeiHreaftt— ^ -' '^ 



-1- 



«I3Xo ,oH .nsC 



( £)T'iii5i'aaH Olio HoaMOT; eht 

( {nol&Bioq'Xoo s ) «'XTlA.giIOO 



.Tjdr-jToD v/ortX moil lB9crc[i( ,dTi:Bll6q;gA 

( "3T~ 



( 



, (aoit 

,09XlQqc[A 



,-^BqnoO QfilrclioH noa.CLiloI' orOT xo bQO£!Bnmoo tlssQ b si eixK 

,-^'30:2100 ^owog: tS ^Irf-ifsiJ: ^•^ar.'-lljsil grsx'daelsO ©rJd" d-anl-cgia ^taGlIoqas 

-;9SJ3nsJ& iQVOoo'i oc)- ,v;d"JXaoj woxiE ^o o'inoo d-Irroiio e::':? ni ^BoT.Ioqqa 

neewd-ecf noxailloo .s ?i:o d-mrooo.o no .dsnisd-airs aeerf orsd o& £cgoIIs 

-gaolocf ^[ojrcd- oIidoc!Od'ir><3 us bOB GoIl9C[q;e tjcT .Socfsiogo t,Go d-ooid^a s 

a^Jv; noisJtlloo oxIJ- o'-BxId' gnlHJtsIo vfixjBlIeqxis ,d-xiaI4;9C[q?5 oxTd- o^ -^al 

sdruxoo jidm l)n£s Mooos jd'siil erid- xxo bol'io- oaw oaso s.cET y\ 

J5e.Cir.x ^JKoiasilXoo osi^ "xo acnid- oxid- &b ,ad*HBTie!3 £fs;G ad-xiegB sd-Jc "^cl 

d-im o ririoooQ srid" jloid-uoo *x8n-oic[ loJ&mr i--^ ' ad- eviarC ■o'- 

ovig od- 59l±s!l: ,8d-ixcvx9o Tosxs B&ae^iz ad"! X'^ « o<*-»-i-j^^ii arid- s^ave 

iassoo xld-"ii3: oxid- brsB ;ibo od& "to do&oiqq^B oxfd- ^o gnlntcew leqoiq 

• oid-vos-xad-ici oad- fioxJoBOiq-fCD 1,30 odd" ae d-xro-jlool -oiij3 dod-sv/ loroTq b 

-at ifolxlw ,Xr1i•:l:;^ ^ixrh .c arAT etroxK «.5o'X'nrooo nolailloo orld- eioxlw 

r-^fo- £>xltl *-^11jj:q &oii Q^ Jfofi^ e exfd- sxtUkU'i d'y±X)ioY.J3 ni: Be^d-Iixa 

■ ' ' ' xloiiiw" jIjLsiid' vron s lo'Jt nold-om b o.5sffi je »J.!.er 

--r-.. >. u u o -..iiiaS Aa^ced'xro nogxroiexi* bsm dxic: :;i!XTt; Jlrrxi ,d-'j:xroo 



^? 



for coctsi^ tTrmr-vrh±eii jTiagiaejlt" tlig~ap'poi:imr{7- lU 'u t ju tyJ L tee this ap eal— 

It ap.eari' from the evidojice that ih.^ ai^p^li-* o . -. 
oporateflk'a single torack street ear line alon^ ^est IJain Street in 
the C.'ty of GalesTjurg, and that Ced^-r Street intersects "Jest Ilain 
Street at right angles, runraing north and south; that lialf a hlock 
or ahout 195 feet east of Cedar Street the street car track forms 
a loop aroxind a public square, v/Mch is ti]gelL as a switch, and In 
the usual operation of the street car line the v^-est-hound cars 
circle around the north side of the square a-.:id then wait on Ilain 
Street at the entrance to thic loop, or sv/itch, for the east- 
ootmd cars to pass onto the loop/ 

On the day of the collision and ju!::'t hefore it occurred 
a west-hound ear v;as standing at tho point nontioned on tlie 
switch, waiting for the east-hound car to turn o^ o switch 

and clear the track. At the sa e 'ci ae/'arp-r- iC 11a j 4 (» a k3 automohile 
oil truck was standing on the northerly side of west Ilain Street 
near the curhing, about 75 feet east of the easterly line of Cedar 
Street, and ahout lEO feet v.-cst of the standing street car. This 
trcuk was a Tory large one, coout 18 foot Ion;, and weighing 
8000 pounds. It contained an oil tank IE feet in length and 4 
f e t \7ide, The driver of tiio oil truck caiio out of a hlacksmith 
shop, in w'lich he had transacted some business, to start tho truck. 
T/hon he casiie out he noticed the west-bound car standing on the 
switch and sa?/ the east-bound car coming alon.-; West Main Str et, 
'Tlien tho east-bound car got to t?ie Cedar Street crossing he 
started tho n chine of the truck and then put on Iiis gldves and 
mounted tho truck, and looked back once more after momiting and 
noticed the west-bomid car still stan6.ing on tho svrltch. '..hon 



-2- 



^^Liio^i^si-t^iM' 9^4 4rjik'.ii ' i . ^l '"^miXru:q&.^& ilt .~S mn:^lmi^:^ito lsl!K moi" - ^aocoo to'± 



^--*Jt.. J»^_ ^X .,^ J^ . , 

fsl: d-ssid-r. nl£Jv! J-boW ^oXxi ©xcll -iso d-eeicB losrd- sl^xls j3^o;J-sieqo 

anno'J: iSOsrs-x* ^^o &Boii-B Qj&i- tetysi^Q xa5©0 lo ^3^9 d'fisl cGI ^irocTc 10 

srrBo fiJHrod-d-e-aw orid" sisll -xso tosita Qd& to rtoid-fitceqo Xeirair srfd- 

ai^l ISO d-ljyv7 Horld- i:;..'3 e-xsxrps orilo lo oMg rfd-ioji erlo ^rarois oXotxo 

-*r;se oxCd" 10I jr{od-Jb7a 10 jQiooX slrl* of ooxieidTis ed& && d-eoid-P. 

\crooI Olio o&ao aascr o& stbo bnsjod 

exit jcib I»9Xiox3'i:sG!n teioq; add" d^ij sJ^^iBnBd-e bc. x^o j.)ijj.':.-oayw ^ 

jSbd-iws r'j oc-rio mird- od* tceo Jtorocf-d-SjaQ erfd" 10I anld-isw .jdod-Jbws 

- -•^- gJltfonod-iJ-B a S &iJBjJo. ^^^Sociti- a:aa edd- dA ,3£oBtcd- erid- ^eslo Joixe 

J'soid'B xi±i5K d-asT; lo eBls ^Xieild-tcorc sxld- no 3nlJ5xiad-3 ajsw ioirrd- Ilo 

iB.5'90 ^o Biill xl^zo^Qr^G &d& lo *aj3G d"9ex 3V d-irotfs ,sjilcfTxro exld" ibqk 

sxifT .ISO d-osid-a -arciJiaad-s ©xld' ^o d^o^ d-90± OS I d-jjocfs firce ,d-09*xd-a 

^ Jons iCdigixal stX i'sox 21 lirsed- Ixo fliz ^J&enlfld-noo d"! .aibiiixog 0008 

dthx3:£osS6 s %o ^fio '^mo iowid^ Xlo oxid- 1x3 tBYtih exfT •sJliw d- 0I: 

.^OJTXd- nxid- d-XBd^a od" ,uaexiiBi/d' eciOQ ^sd-oeBcsid- lissi ©rf rioxKW n±«-C[oife 

arid' no siiJfc.Eo3d"3 %so ibimod-dTsow oiid" ^ojbtori exf tiro eroso 9x1! koxR/ 

,*6"rcd-a alBli d'seW ?.xioXa saJkcaoo iso JEimrocf-d-pBo eiSJ' wbb j&GvS x£od-±vr^ 

9x1 solaaoTo d'eo'id'S xsJ&eO «f^t od" d-o^ xso J!)njTOd-»d"8e0 ©xid^ xxsxfW 

5nc av^ifiX:^ atx: jtto ^'uti: nf ' ' ' " -loxrid- (aad" 3eo axil'doifix orld^ BedTrsd'a 

.'i:n 3CcJtdTjjoiri T:od'iD ib'xora o:-.'ic .•.■jjj<f fieotodl ^nji ,Sojrc(f Oi{* fjod'mxom 

r : " .Jlo^ivrs ©xld- ao 3«jt|iK "• '"''-a iso Jcntixocf-d'sex? gxfd* fi^old-on 

V 



the eaGt-l)OUiid ear pasr;ed him ho started Ms '..ruck and drovo it 
west on 17est Ife.ln Stroet imtil lio -;ot past tlie mdClo of Cedar 
Str et, then turned tho truck south, maiding the tnim as miickly 
as ho - ould to cross the str. et car tracks, hut i,7it:::0ut looking 
at the approaching str et car, which he know would be alonjj, and 
without previously indicating that he v;as ahout to turn. He 
had partly crosned the tra,ck when the west-hound car struck tho 
trucir at a point just i2i front of the hind wheils, and wrec5in»: it, 

Che driTG- of vli: "'ruck had, pre--ious to . .oynent 

"by the /ap.iellai§9;&V^ been in the employ of a^iaLioe, and was familiar 
with the mojoner of tiie ope::o.tion of aij^^eaAee-*.^ str et car line, 
at the place ^ -mentioned, and he had also been comiected v;ith the 
running of tho sa e car w^j-ich colJ.icUed with tho truck. He 
admitted that he knew tliat tihe car ctationcd o.t 'ulie sr/itch woul 
start westerly as soon as tho east-hound car passed the switch, but 
testified that he t'lought he ioad sufficient tine to Lia":e tl'ie -"^urn 
at Cedar Street and to cross the tracks before the street car would 
reach him, but he did not rialre any attempt to ascertain •.vhetZaer it 
would or not, y'-^ 

As to whether a^^>eilee-Le motorman wac '^niilt^r of the negli- 
gence cliarged in the counts of t/ie dalaEation upon wMch -(iie ease 
was tried, and whether the driver of t:;^e autonobile truck wac 
guilty of contributory nerrligence wMch con-f^ributod to brinj^ about 
the collision wer question?:- of fact which c^n be deter juined only 
from the eridence, end tlic iury was best chle to deter?ilne these 
questions, Havin"- seen and '-leard the witnesses t]ie .jury was in 
the best position to .judge of the credibility of the witnesses and 
of the weiglit to be -aven to their testir.iony, anJ. this court 
cannot say tlaat tlio .jury should have found differently on the 

-3- 



CI evo^ bns 2lajj"i' alil J5od"ii3d-J2 oif cdtrf JSoaaBcr r?o ">m!-o'r-.t^,'3o c ■ 

•^oixrp a^ jmaa* odd- ^.btafjf ,jc£firb8 i^bjTtcd" os!S^ bBatsr^' siBdA ,d-sr>id-a 
. ; 5^JbtooI '^ssoii'^Jbvi d-ircf ,a3Eoi3id' tso ts its erE^ aaorco Oo J5Xrro" ©rf a^' 

sH »si'£sst ot d-i;ocfe as^r erf &s^it -^tl&SioHbisJi ■^sIsixoiTO'rq: d-xra'ltlw 
add- -^ossxie^ ^cso iixi£;odf*4s9\7 sffd* xc^ifv? iLois^^ ej# l^saoro •^d-xscr Bad 

•EBilxm^Gl: BiBw ^jKa^ ,ofrf-:fe*%!B to ■^olq^m© Qd^- six. Jiaao' v^^ssed^iw-^^yi-.w Tjtf 
,911x1 ISO d-0 id's !5*-»^ffe^^ xo noxchs'xoqo orl* lo isnosxa sxld- ricUrr 
9£fo xfd-iTi? £>sd-ooi:moo neotf oalis Barf sri fiiis ,5©iioftoom eo. ' 

911 .•iosjt^ ci.a- xtMisr Be.SJtIXoo iCo^JtriwiBO aiiiBa exld- lo ^j:ix:uo;i 
Xirow iod-Jrvro 5oxiol5fx5d-a xso sri3' d-cilit 'V?ad2E axl d^^ 

d-ird" .riod-lwa ©xiO- .boi2ti£iC[ -xeo Imrorf-d-as© oiftj"- as ixooa as Tilieoao':.' a-ij^-js 
xiiipr ©dd- er-ten ot eirtid- d-jcsloljaus ^SfC ©if- tr^jjOiDf Oil d'add' Bei^ld-aod- 
JfJIxrow Tea d-aa^sha Qxt^i' a'loiaci' satofstEd- ©x£^ asoTo oi M^^irbei&B i&bBO Jn 
d-jc %Oii&oiiyi aXi^rx&o&c ot i-qmoC^s^r xi^tB astern iJ-oir i&JtJB oxt d-xrrf , " 
.„.„...-..■,. .._.- ; - -^-.to. 

OBfio axB" xfoixfw ixoq:JJ" iiold-caoJiDjB arDt 1:p atauo o o^d' fltl, Beg^sxto esiif: 

r^xnr itoirxd" sllcroiirod-urs ©jid- ±0 levlnfi sxjtd' laxld-orlw i>-OS ^Beii* ?j3r: 

d-irocTe gnJtrtcf od" JBod-XTrfix+xroo xfolxfw aone^li^eii x^otssditisxoo 1q -^d-ULog 

•^Xcto 'b&aim'SBteb ©cf xieo rioxxfw to^ to anold-aaxrp "Tcaw jjxpiaiJUIPQ c.ri 

aaerld^ QahfT£9&Qb od" aldb d-aocf bj^w ^^xuf; oxfif J&nc tOortaBxYo oxld- racnl 

nl asff x^xrl arCd- aasaaK^Jnra- add- J&^«©x( Jbxtx^ rcaaa sxijtT^H ,f3xtold-G©s;p 

ta aaessxid'lw oxfit *o ■z&iltdlbo'io ©xld" to p^Mt, od" xtpid-JcaO' rid^ 

t-xtroo aixft Bctc ^•^o.'nJtd-ao.t -xioxld- od- xtoYi^, od' pd- d-xl^lov/ exld' xo 

no Yj:&£tQiQ'i'±lb bcuTOl ovj?A blisoda "^xtrt oxid- d"J3rId- "^ea d-ortrxco 



evidonee rJrecentecI. It is a r/Gll sottlod rale tliat Llie verdict of 
a jxLT^ should not "ne disturbed imlesa it is clearly liii-I r:B,^if g ' tly 
against tlae T7ei^lit of tlie evidence, rSiieli is not the caso here, 

t-- Ob.jection was '■la'^e fay <» ^llan1 »' on tlie trial to the intro- 
duction in evidence of sections 15 and 19 of t ic City Ordinances 
of the City of GalGS-Durg, Sec;tion 15 requires of drivorc of 

veliicles that " in tiirning whllo in motion or in starting to turn 
from a standstill-, a signal shall he given hy indicating viith. the 
xfiix'o or ":.and, the direction in V7hich the turn is to ho y-are;" and 
section 19 provides that " traffic on the east and \7est stroct 

shall have the ri'jht of T7ay over traffic on tho north and south 

- j< - 
streets," ^^/ [Dhore v/as no error In -.diil-tinrv -<iLio coctions of the 

ordinance in evidence. 

Under subdivision 9, article 5 and chapter 25 of 1 Jonos 2: 

Addington's annota,ted statutes, the City of Galeshurg liad poorer 

to pass ordinances of this character, to reg-ilate tho uce of streets 

hy vehicles. Zhese sections of the ordinances are reasonable, 

and the requirements are a proper regulation of traffic on the 

streets of tho city, and if obeyed would uncloubtodly promote the 

cafety of vehicleSytSfsinp the streets aiid perlaaps preisent collisions 

and accidents, v A violation of tho ordinB.nce v/as a circumstance 

proper to be considered by the .jury in determining a question of 

contributory negligeiioe, 

\ ^ J^J ■ 
A number of objections are a/e bv siDpellant concomin-j in- 

Gtructions given for a.ppollee,cZ- f-ti^ clair.ed that it w'as error 

to ;give the 7th anc lEth instruct-, one for ap^ee^+ee , ■.vhich nre- as 

fOllOTTS:- 



-4- 



■^olb'wv Ad-j jteri;* eXsn J&oi*d"08 Hew js al ;J"I mbe&aor.o'Xii eoneJolvo 
*eiQA sajso 9x6: c^o^ ax rfoJtxiw .eoueiiive ojcQ- to i-rf^i®^ ©*'^ ^aal.'-^s^ 

esoiisrtiB'xO ^#10 orft 1:o eX Ms 3X Baot&oQs lo sonoiiiYe iiJfc aol&oa!) 

"io B^GvliJS lo ss^JtJTporc SI nojtd-r-eo ,j}'ixrd[5o.C.Qv 'to tt.+IO ertd" lo 

niH-d- od- ^^oiato al to ffOJtd-oai Hi ©XJxtw -^^aisj^ nl ..oIoxxIqy 

extf xfcJ-J:^/ ssJt^soJtSnX ^ issvira etf XX-sxib Xfifl^a 5 .^lX±:&Bi>ria^Q s laoii: 

J6rts "^Qj^s^ii ocT oJ- oX xriird' oii& xfoiifer nx noxo'-osixJo arid- ,JB«s6n t:o qixl-a 

: ^a9«Ec)-a &Si^7f .Tiff?* #ttiso erlj- xio ortls-i^" " isrl^ aoJ&XTq^ccj; GX nol^oos 

eil* iQ «4xoito62 oxiiJ' -^iAi-loLs al icme oxi sijwr etor^ >o^ "•stooid-Q 

, .afitvs ss± tJnnsGlJ&TO 



& R snot "£16 3S Tsah^Md Mb 3 ©Xold-'xc ,t' ncxalrxjara 'xo.. 

is-woq f>sxt sUTdaeX/sO "2» •^10 axid- «aec^I^;^X5d■s isiJ-jsd-orais 8''iio,-'jiix...ijA 

toeid-B lo earr srld' ataXir^©^ ot ,To*a0ifixiD alxid" lo asortsnXfi-xo assa od- 

, 9l rfriaoaaei ©ib soonsmlb'm ©rf* lo anox^oaa ©sorlT .-^oZoldsY -^d 

Qdi- no oxfiB'xd- tto iI6l(^J3XI;3«T -xofrotq; e ©"x^ ad'xxonj'lix/po's: erid- fiOB 

srii- Gd-drto'io; '^isoocfiroljxijj J5Xwov; J5ei;ed"o ^x Mis j^d-Xo erid- to adsaite 

snoXaxXXoo tnesrs'xq; ac[srIi9C[ 5r£B ad*9^«nE-*a .©it^-roiiak aoIoXxIev lo -^oles 

ooiind"8r:3^oilo £ Si^-w oox:.arfXfrio ej5& lo no.frd-sXoI'. ' ^' •ad-xi©J;xoofi iuie 

lo aoiueeirp-c ^niriiifr'rod'el) xtl TTiJTt oiij'^d /jsic jx axioo odT o;^ tcocfoiq 

, .sonesXXlJort "^OitxrcfXid-rfOo 

-xil -^ixcxoaxtoo tex:. t' A%ari o-xjb axioXd"oet,cro lo locTitttrii: 

'XD1T9 8JJW i"! d'axlc^ J&oiwl^Xo ift^it"*'^ li^.ooXXoqqjB toI nevX?^ axiold-oxnd-3 

7. r : rFoxxfv,- , » »±£t^ -^ lol axioidoxfid-Bni rid- .>3 o& 

' - ■ ■■' .'•. -:swoXXo± 



"7, 2Iio Oo"urt instruotc tlie jury tlmt if you 'bollGvo 
from tliG evidence tliat tlio driver of tlie auto truck in question, 
as he approached the ntreet car track croscin;-; at Cedar otr:-et on 
I.Iiain Street, r/ould "uy the e'corciso of ordinary care, h- vo ascer- 
tained that a street c ar was approaching the inter rjection of 
Cedar and I!ain Street, avid_v,'ould lay the e^serci'^e of ordiioary care, 
have prevented the auto truck ho was driving from passing onto 
the street car track, and from oeing ctruck hy the Btreet ear at 
the intersection of said streets, then your •■erdict inu;;t he for 
the defendant," 

"IS. The Court instructs the jurjir, that if you oelieve 

from the evidence that the driver of tlB auto tiiick in question, 
hy the esercice of ordinary and rea' onable care for tge safety 
of the not or truck he v;as in cherge of as he 3.pproached the 
crossing in question, j^ould have neen and known that a car of the 
defendant v/as coning, and would have avoided the accidont hy 
the exercise of o:;di::'iary care on his part, then aiid in that case, 
even if you should further "bolieve "roin the evidence that the 
defendant's servants in charge of said car, failed to give any 
signal of the ap roach of said car to said crossing, yet the 
plaintiff cannot recover in fiis smt and your .-erdict should he 
for the defeMant," -^ 

Sho instructions set forth are not suh,1oct to tho criticism 
made "by the apoellant; they did not take from the Jury the con- 
sideration of the question of "\7]iether or not the truck d.river,just 
hofore and at the tiroo of the colliL-ion, was in the exercise of 
due care, out cuoLiitted the question to tha j'^^^y. t^h ether the 
exercise of ordinaiy care on the part of the drivor of the auto 
track would liave reauired him to ascertain tliat a street car was 



-5- 



CTolIoG S30-Z tl d-M'S' "^c^l 9xfd- ad-oir-xoanj: d-nrovO euI2 .V" 
iro d-ssitP* TfiBeb d-B sJttloaoio ■£os's& ttep ^8©»s:4"a ofliJ' iJ©iioJ2o;s<rc[S erf ao 
lo Jioid'ooa^Gd'Xil od^ ^MoBfyxqqs etm ^xb o too*t&Q Blrsdi^ Bealsd- 
od-Jio ;3ixi;a8sc[ xnoxl gfl:jhri:T:J& am? oxT ^osrit o^siq Qd& J&ed-iic 

ijd-G^B erfd" 10 3: eiao . BldsaoQSQi Jbms i^aKJtBno . /ip ..jseip'XfiGE© ejii*- ^ 

Gilcf fiox£osoirc_[q.e ©xT as lo og-ssrlo iix ai3X7 sxl Somd* •rod'on odd- xO 

©dt ^p. xao .8 ifedd- ii?iojcDi fuxjj xceee #vJ3i! filiroiT. «ixold^asijp xil ^nltaaoio 

^ ^^£ceMc^)B odd" -5S-61orB ©tM BJjrow fims i^inibb asvj' d-jccBJiceler) 

,oaso :^Jsdd• xtl xirue xfod- ^{hEsqr ai:d ipo e*cB?» '^BniB'ico 'io saxoioxe odd- 

^ifi^ d•B££^^ o^ateMvQ odd" mO'S'fc evellod lodd^xA £ii;oxfe jbpo'^ li hoys 

■^fts ,9Ti^ o^ J&©Xi\ci ^tOQ blss "±0 s*8^Mo irl sd-oriV^Q r;'d-XSBto©!!:o"> 

affc}- ^s^ ^'^aiaaoia J&lisa od- *s:bo Blisa "±0 dt)J30«g(lfi add" 'Sfco Xjan^Jte 

©tf j3.Ii;oda 7otiiio'- "WOX ^^>i^ tissB 3M& rti rfeTOoei d-Onxtso 5:^ld-xslslq 

. ^ . > . ^ ..^..-v ..;,;:•■'->■ ^■'■'■" "■'' -!'-'-^- " ,d-ix3teart95 arid- tol 

iHsxoid-i^o sxCd- od" d-p©t«fi3B d"Oii sr^JEs dd^rol:^©© aitoJtd'ojri-d-aa;! crT 

-xioo end- ■^Tir^ odd" BKn:"± €i:i£d- d-on MB -^mU- ;fiiBilQqq,s> odd" -^cf obsm 

^Bisv^^tortib -loart'^ .:d-3@jrp c "oid^visjaia 

3:0 deiozoxQ add- xil c;*iv; ,ii a'iOjtod 

odlTB odd 'i;o -..-vXi^ .>!.>. io d'*£©q odd ao o'xbo ■^BX3:jt5io lo o^xotoxo 
;:>~ -jceo (J-odde a d-jsdif- ala&iooae o& mM heilitperi: oTsd bSjso\- ioxnd' 



-D- 



approacliing, and Tzliotlior tlio exercise of ordinary care on Ms 
part would iiavo prevented liis drivin]- onto the street car track 
and liave avoided the collision. Instructions of substantially 
the sane import have he en repeatedly sustained hy oiir stiprone 
court. ( Chicago City Hail-/ay Co. t O'Donncll, 203 111. £67; 
McEniiy v 2ri-City Rail-iTay Co., 179 111, App, 152; Chicago 
Union Traction Co. , v Dihvig, 107 111, App, GM; Boanlon t Union 
Traction Co., 127 111, App, 406; VJeher Y 0,B»ei ^.Railway Co,, 
142 111, App. 150.) 

7-^ Ap^ll-^jst also asoigns^ for error the gi.viiig of the 3rd 
instruction, tThich is ar^ follo^vTS:- 

"The Coiirt instructs the .jury that in crdcr to entitle the 
plaintiff to reeOTe:; in t'.is ;-aKe from tjie defendant, txio things 
must coiicur snd appear from a pj-eponderanee of the eTidence, 

First. That such defendant \7as guilty of negligence wich 
caused the injury complained of, and 

Secondly, SZoat the driver of the auto ti-uch in quoction 
exercised reasonahle and a.'dinary care for the safety of the 
auto truch, and of th^ plaintiff fails to establish hoth of those 
essentials "by a pro onderanco of tlie evidence, ^our "ordict must 
bo for the defen-ant." 

The ibooction made is that tins instruction in no way fixes the 
time \7hen the driver sliould l^ve h^^en in t-io G::,->rciso of ordinary 
cG-rc, and that it eliminates entirely the proposition of oQual 
rights at a crossin . In the :.ttor of fixing tiiiie, the in- 
struction munt be corisidered r/ith the other instructions given 
in the case and T;hen read in that connection Bic tirae is de- 
finitely fixed. Ilor does it eliminate the proposition of equal 
rights of -xirties at the crossing. Parties are cliarged~;itla the 

exercise of dne care, r;hcn driving vehicles over a crossing, as 

-6- 



.:ii' xto 0X30 x^asil&ixo lo oeJtoiexe exTd" lod&osSvi fine .gnixIojEJoiqac 

-^IsIuJxcd-aou-s 5:0 anoxd'oincd'Bnl ^isolsxlloo Bd& hohxoYB evsri J6na 

a7eiq:ire "mo "^cf JSsniBd'SJxa '^Xfisd'Bocfoi iieetf ©vad d-ioqcii arass oil* 

jVaa .III 80S ,IIomioa'0 v ,oO ^S'-vIisS -^lO osBOJcjcTO ) .d-nroo 

oseoiifO ;S2I .q^A •III SVI ,,oO TgewIxsH "^d-JcO-JriT v tsxIxxSoM 

"nolrrtJ v aol£is.oB ;i'^d .(jqA .HI VOI ^glvcflCI V. ,,oO no' ::cJ:iiU 

,,oO •^vjIIsH.v ;&«S.O V "SQdoS'I ;B0^ *qqA,sll VSX ,,oO nor^oa^^ 

(.031 ,q]q[A.III SM 

^S exij lo scivig srfi)- •xoiig lox^rrgjc&ajs oa Is. -wn^it©**^ **" 

-;awQllOl se at xfolriw ,noi;t)i^:t^3IIl 

a^JCX-tiio- (wrd- ,teBf^rsD'ioii qxIo*- irro:ci oajBO BJLrft nI -i^syooci od" l!txdTil^Iq 
*ecic©iJiT0 erld^ ±o soxcB'ssfaioq-ecq; s pro'i^r TJB.agffC hns •sxrortoo d-sina 
rio Ir^w^oixs^il'^an: io ^-cMxu^ as?.- drra&eo^to.o doir.s d"J3ri2 - ^d-ercll 

,. . , ... fine ,1:0 Jbeiiiislqnroo x^rlal exit J&©BXi»t 
fioxt-aoup Hi :£os.n.& o&sss. exi& It) ^Tir3CJ& sxfcr d-fir£2 ,-^J:iE0oe8 

©Borri- a» xK-oci mtL6&&Be 03" sljtci ^id-isJtan^ -ilsh :5bt) J6a:s .ilSoirxci- o#iis 

e.ff;?- 3or:.f^ 'T-ct; o.ct III rtox-J-ojrEcfsirl airfd" tBcio si eijjsnr uol^oetrf.i: 9j1T 

i^sinlbi'' :oi:.uZQ ed& jDLi aeocf sTarf ^Iifoxls rrevlifi ortf nGrTrr cntld' 

iGfjpe ic JKol^iaoq;&<iq; oxEo TSli^'^'sitn© aed-jaalirtllo d"! d-jBxit , o 

-xU: oxld" ^acrtid' •galxll lo •£ .'.do"- ££l , xilaaoio i'£ 

xr^-"f-" ".Toxd-ojrxd-sxij: loxld-o edt iitv beiehtsaoo cf d-^xrai X£o±d'oi'Tr*a 

ortid- oxw aoiuoonnoo d-isrfd' «x bs&t a obbo ©x: rxi 

lanpo 'S:© ixox ;>laofiO'iKL exfd- e^aclnille cM seoii loK ,I»oxtl TClod-lnH 

i t^l^be^nst!^s> orcB a sierra? •^AleaoTo oxfd- &s seltnor lo ajfrlsli 

?. .. ,Sffi3Bc:Eo ii *i:c"ro aeIolx£ov najtvl^5 nariv; .q'xbo Q!j-j5 lo oaloio:xo 



v;g11 as elsowlicre. 

ThG objoction naclo to the giving* of the 10th inct ruction 
for appGllee are :iot tenable, for the rGe^sons abo^-e stated. 

An. objection is alco nade to a nodiflcation by the ooict of 
the 12th instruction given for appellant. The instruction does 
not erabody a correct stateraent of the law, and the :j;Odification 
did nat harm the appellant. 

We are of opinion tliat the instructions, taken together, state 
he la\7 applicable to t is case with substantial correctness, 
and that no eiror vjas coiniaitted jit er intlie ;p-Y±ii^, of instructions 
nor in tha laod-ifications m.iC.e by the court, 1'he judgment ilh-ould 
therefore be affinied, 

Affimed. 



-7- 



■ ' ^ !"• .e-foifWDaXs 8e 1X3X7 

*iSo£sd-a o'.'odB axsoa^O's aria- lol ,9IcIbiioc>- ton ens eellec 
ic d^-attH) qA^ %iS rzoii'Bo£±s:£fom A ^ ^h&n. oBJEa B± iSold-oet^o nA 

G0itj3oiil5>o>r c?i£d- -8&3 ,ti7jsl ©fit 'id iJ^x^or'&d-jai^a &oqtxoo ■& -^jfiocfnrs d-on 

.cj'rtsllsqqs ©ild- xffiaii d-iSn .5JL5 

ed-s#3 ,'X9iic^.'Jgoc^ ii3:^s^ ^aJiold-oJJ':L;}-ajcfx sild- tarfd- xtoitticro Ifco oric ov; 

^sseinfoGTioo I^idjauotacTire iftxw easo aid" o# ©irfjsoilqqs waC ad 
suol^o-v'^aal io salYJt3 erStaJ: i9;:d-i!. Bed-tiranioo 3£W loTie on d-crSt fins 
fjXxroifc iJ-aoirsgluft 8x12 .drnxroo exCd- TjcT e^u^ra anold-BoiltJt^om odd- nl non 



^b^rtXitk 



-t)/C 



■■-■■■ t \- 



;vl' 



.1 .;' Ji J J 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, [,, 

SECOND DISTRICT. I ^'^^ I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my band and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

da}' of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and . 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



.M'lfflo Vf(( III 
f)i:i' VMI j-i^. o!l'..';*'l'»rl 



Qf^ 





"■'•"■■^iii. 




/ 


^ / 


-f 







AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 

Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois; 

Present--The Hon. JOHN M, NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice. f 

f 

Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. | .-.««. 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. *W|i) U X»rl« tJ *>' U 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. I 



/VW/v-/'-'^\ (^ f-^-^^^^uJii^-ci 



\ 
\ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
APR 1 4 ^O'lR the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



ail 11 ^c f-isiZ ccii ?o )oit' 

.'^■zi^BSJl anicr2S7«I ,c'..ri 

. -30 i i ?iDL , JJ3u 

.fig i:o ,Y''iiua . 



L U ^ i_i »;l V.' r. 



>■- _ ^ X 



no ; J r w -o i , r 



Ge • IIo. 6190. 



William Pried"berg, 



Appollant, 



-V3- 



Claronee S.DePev;, doiiag 
iDTisiness as tlie "Practical 
■^^'•dvertising Corapany", said 
Jolin R.Hondorson, as Slierif 
of Kendall Coun-bsr, Illinois, 
Appellees, 



Appeal xTOTfi Kendall Countr/. 



UIEHAUS, J, 



In t'lis case, a bill in eo-iity vras filed October 14, 
1914, by appellant, in tlie c irciiit coui't of Kendall Comity, to 
restrain tlio enforeer.ient of sxl e"ecution, issued upon a judg- 
raent rendered against appellant in tlie oircrdt court of Sangaraon 

County/f" The bill allege^ that oi& ^©» -sfeoiit ¥^l»2evLS3:j 14,1944*-, 

.^jC- ^r-- *-^ ' . / ■• -^ -''^- ..vv?J"^ 

tikefcudT^e^Hiee entered into a contract with oi>pellant~ throuf?h 

/ appella*i=&^ agent trhereby a^pv>©^ll&ft., by the name o: "1 

Advertising Company", agreed to i'urnish to aprrollaiat certain 

articles of raerchaiidise, and perform pertain a-cts to benefit 

a^^llarrt'H? businesn- the app^ilsriT-- a merchent ia ¥trr!¥- * 

p I.' 

-vilitr-, -i^CTLteli Qoir-^^-^, id tiiat a]9^©^l.ee-' guaranteed thereby to / 



i 



increase ap-a4iant*i5 business. p^A-c^y 
a.ife4} a c hod "'te- the bill -atj-aau- e?daibi 



CO ntract ref er r ad.^ 



The bill farth:r a3.1eg s that appellant entered into 
this contract ^.vith appelD.oe, "oiily in consideration" that a;:— 
police should in good faith carry out ::',nd perform terras and 
conditions of t>-c contract on >ii« part; and t :at ap ellaD.t's 
business should be thereby increased over the business of the 
corresponding months of the precedinp year; and that appcll e , 



'''W 



-1- 



,0CI6 .. 



,X&rjsoO Ilfil^aoH ijiotr'i X^ssqqA 



! 



,oTj::?XIoqqA 



.aistfJbelT'g: cjsillir 



-BT* 



I^OJM-Oi5l2" Olio BS 

.asellomjA , 



CO 
cT 



.T; .gUAPillPI 



d-llenecf oo- a&oG n.s.s&i.eo^ molrec; tas ^sslLxuadoriGm Ic '-..ro.*t'.:i3 
-^ I t o? Hi tnedoiea a .nlvd i ratxiIXc i qciG add- -Gaor:l5iTcr jr^-r- ./*? 






---j^-fS- ;'• 



?:^ 



«t. 



s^ 



ooxxa -Cis'iOuGc d-jnsXXoriqa i-&d& a- ^eXXe 'i^iiJixrx Hid" oxIQI 

- ■;b d-.cxa- "uoiu'^BiefiXsnoo xtl -^Xjio" jOoXXofrqs. xttJtw tosr^iioo aixid- 

drcR iian&& nroltEor .&r>x ;J-xro x^ibo A&lsl £003 rcl f>lJj-oxlB seXXsq 

3'j££cXXo as d-ja:'»t ixc.':^ «*"XBq Rlxi no &osn&tioo ed& lo aaol^J-lMoo 

■^0 SEaclBxrtf edcEf tcovx) .beBaotont -^cTorEorf^ 00' ^XxrorCs aaoftlsjicT 

IB ;"^o\;: :''aiBeoo'3:q ex£j- lo axl^nora ^rrlBnoqasi'roo 



-X- 



throTigh its agent, a:id otlierv/ise, proposed aad guaranteed said 
increase in ■business, and proposed said plan solely for the 
pizrpOGS of increasing appellant»a iDiisiness; and tiiat although 
appellant entered into caid s.rrenga lent for the sole purpose afore- 
said, his bueinss, instead, of increasing, decreased during the 
months the plan was in operation, to the anount of iioarly OlOOO, 
as compared with the business of the eorrespondln.-: months of the 
precediniT year; that appellee utterly failed and neglected to 
perform the terms a-nd conditions of the contract in vood faith 
and thereby also failed to caUvse any inoBaee in appellant's busi- 
ness, although appellant, on his imirt, did all in Iiis joower to 
carry out the purpoee of said contr^act, 

Che bill furthei" vUegss tliat appellee failed ezid. neglected 
to make up to appellant or to recount to him, for the money lost 
by him as appelloe v;o-s bound to do by :;aid contract, to the e:rtont 
of :i400. i-i- ^fesr >4>aJJ. further S"vaife«».th£it on or aoout June, 1914, 
one of the days of t'iie May term of the circuit court of Sangamon 
couiity, the ■ ap»ei3:tTe as "Practical AdveitisiAg Coppanj?'" iDrocurcd 
to be entered, 'h-^ i;omc r.eans unlaio-;m to api?eii«ai, a pretended 
judgment against him in fche -rretended sum of ;)'440, \7ith costs 
amounting to i!;5,40, all without the personal kno-.vledge of appollaa*; 
but, as he has sixice "(^qq-h liiformed, and upon such information 
states tfeH:vfEr.trfc::.ta it to be a fact; and tZiat on or about July 14, 
1914, a pretended execution ■vras ir.,sued by the clerk of the circuit 
court of Sangamon coiijaty, upon raid pretended .judgment; that 
aftervxard a pretended execution uas pl^.cod in the hanc).s of the 
sherif q£ Sead^l-l- .«»«3ity^ for service, and that tho sherif seired 
the same upon €mvjollaa*i on or a'jout August 14, 1914; and then. 



bias .b&e&siBiBSTg Aiio beBoco'sq, ^eaiwioif^o Mb ^drte^js ad"! ris^otcrid" 
exJO- loi •^I0lo3 obIo: Iijtija fje-aoqoiq; fm& jQsenisjcjcT ni easoioni 
r£si/o^f*Is &Bd^ boB jaaanlajircr 3»d-nsIXoqq>8 ^^alass'XOjai J- 

-©lole esocftcircr 6Xo3 era- lol ^ix&riBSJ^eTis Mbg ottrcj , •feei;©*)'!!© *J¥j? 

«OOOI?i; -^i-SGn. xo d-mromG ed& oil- .xioid-o-icogo ni asm aslq ed& Bridrcofli 

od- iJ©#opXsoii .fijxs J5oX.te± ^^cXiettxr soXXeqg^j d-exld- I'lso^ srtlBaoeiq 

xtd-Xijli 5oo?, XXX d-oj3T;d"n-oo eric}- ^o anolcMiifioo Mb sm-ro^ e4d- nnoiieq 

-isxrcf a^d-nsXXscige at easmial Xfm objxbo od- J50XIOI: oaXc '^d'Qieild- Ms 

od- -lowoq: sixi Hi XXc .51?) <,dT:Bq a.M ao , driaXXGCfqjs if^irorfd-Is .aesn 

♦ d-os^d-Goo BiB0 lo eaogtc^ 0xld-,d-jjo 'prrtso 

Jjed-oeX^eJi 3m fieXi&l: sdXl^qga d-j^d* 80301X0 rted&'nfX Txr 

d"30l •^sno-n exit "siol: ,mi£ o^ d-mreoos- ©;3' -id d-i£sXX©qq[a c- -.- — -.- - 

*iiod-s:e Gild- 0^ « f 0!5*xd"no SiBS ^iSd o.& ot .toxrocT .a^7 soXXstrqa ea jEirf "^d 

,MGX ,©mrl d-xrocfe •xo.^itp ;t.r5k;?^,»i»9*^ i:oxCd-%i3^ ■ M<f i i > - ggH' ^-i* .00^9 3:o 

nora.^.^nsg lo rixroo d-i^j-o^Eis sfK)- ^o mTCod- t-^M -©rid- ^o a^saJ&--0i{d':^o^§Xio 

:^nQo jSd-jfe „ 0|^^§ ±c flrJim BsBHTftd-eir: 0rid al mid ^mUs-i^ :^^irf; 

,. 'io e^oXvTojccS* XanoaTiOM'to .tiroifdiw Tli ",Oi»,cr^ od- ^id-jrc»oxie 

noid-eiu'io'toi xforrg noqir Lis .3 t.&onTioltiti xiescf eonis asxf exi a-s jd-ucf 

,M •\5XifT. ;^J70<Ji3 -lo ao daxld- M.q ;d-o£;l a etf od ti ffib'irojSSbaCTf ' -: ..tBd-5 

ilsjo-zlo oild lo 2[ioXo orCcf %6 besssal bbw ttoid-jjoexs JSeMetfc _ ^ 1.9.1 

^artiJ- ; dxter isijjjc. BoBrtod-eiq: bloB aoqa ^TCdrtiroo nocLorno--^ '^ro rViiroo 

effd aO ainoxi oxid- fxx JiooaXcx aatr itoldirosxo J&elirted'e' _ jI- 

'-.VTEa-s 'ii-s^ed-!! ©fid- J-^rid" basi ^eoivxon lo"]: fasg*|S»ft«^ Xfr'^-'iK^Si-aw- rii*:£0jc{3 

, txarrd-.Oar'. ji^ieX ,-M dT3j:;7jirA txrocfi:: •ro no 4*i noqir omca orfd 



on or about September 50, 1914, lev:i,ecl. it upon certain real esto-te, 
wMclL iiS : lO proiDortjr of app^lla»* sitiiat^ in tlie villc- • 
YorJcville, ia KeMall oeriii-bsfc; tliat tMs le'^ry by tlio sheriff was 
onterod of iccorcl, and atill re -.ains of record, to tlie prejudice, 
injury and daniage of appallan t in Mr. irasiness and reputation, 
ana constitutes a cloud upon Ms title to the premises levied upon, 

G^he "bill also alloges that the a,ppellec proposes and 
threatens to instract and direct the sheriff to publicly adrerti re 
and sell the premises levied xipon under ar.d by .irtuo of naid 
pretended execution ai.d levy, siid tliiit tiie sheriff threatens to 
so advertise and ooll the sa^ne, and thus further cloud appollrjat's 
title and further injuxe 'nli^ in /lis business, property and reputa- 
tion, and that appellant fears thc^' ■■.vill carry out their threats 
unless restrained by the orc^or of the court, 

"^ Kie ^JjJ slBO avera tloa.t the ser^'ice of tlie execution ovl 
appdHssi-yfc* v/as the>fi:&st notice "actual, constructive or otherv7ise", 
which aj^pellaa^ had of the existence of the .judgment ia. tke Ssngainoti 
eoujfity iiireuit e^urfr, no stu^raons or other process having- been 
served upon him previous to the entering of tiie .judginont , and that 
the F^y term, 1914, of 'icer^ c ourt had adjourned for the tern before 
the tine mentioned, and that it ?/as only from the alleged protenSed 
executionthat he learned tliat the sum of 15440, v;ith interest from 
Juno, 1914, had been bo recovered against him by ap-*^i©e in an 
action of " assumpsit-confession''^ in the oircftiit eourt afL §i3.nsaJ5iOn _ 
caun%^ te^tfe«r with costs '!>«- ^te anount of §5,40»__ 

The bill also states that appellan* never, to his knov/ledgo, 
executed or signed any judgment note authorizing the judg -.ent , and 
that in ease such judgnont note exists, or ever existed, containing 
his signature, such signatiu-e is a forgery; or, if -enuinc , it r;as 



^ 



,Q&^&BQ Isoi nls&ioo aoqxj il hep/el ,Mei ,0S lecrmed-qee d"jJ0cre 10 no 

S£W 1:^±X9xfcs oAi xd x^qX Bhii- &Gd.& ^mt^- J^fe Jao a Z. J E U— fOSUs^V'^ 
.eolIijyQdTq; add- o* ^hiofy^r lo snlsnTST^ Ilfd-s ^ne ^fircooc: l-o be'ze&ao 

*sioq_v ^ivel 6©sxuior«5 ©j£^ 0* ecX^W sM .aogu' -SxroXo s soc^JJ•d•ld■8IIOo 5n:a 
J5£L0 B&8oq_OTq oQlIegqB odd", d"^;!: 3'3g9iXj oaXo Ilxcf eiil! 

■ •stXRjei J&iii5 •^i9qo:cq jSBonJtBifcf alxi xU: mijci etuy^al *csjda"«jl Mjb old-xd- 
ad'^e'XfCeh ilcrid- d-Jtro ij^'iao XlJtw lJOx£;^ atcjsel: ^xcjsIXqq^is d-aM Bite «ftoirf- 

^..., :-... ., ■., . - ■;:: ■^^^^v\ jk--'^ "^ 

Ho iioxtxrossre 9r& 'io ©oXtsbs ©dt d-Md- ««»¥» o©*©- J^h^ --erif ^~ 

isoKSgfi»8..4iuctt jsi .tnem^Jb-trf; ad* 3:18 ©otte^axxs sxld" ^0 ^d ^«eXX-©*r^o xfolriw 

* iroerf 3clT«ad. aeeooiq: •ifeilt^' 10 aJCtocmua on j^hcss^^ «^i»&a:i£L T^asros 

tafft Becs ,d'H0m§fijBt @j^ ^ gxil'xod-ij© sxfcl' ©it Birolvenq: aM aocisr B0T103 

j66£ii6d-o-cc: fio^oxij3 oflrf- zno'xl -^Xnp.ai^^^X !^Bd^. Lsm ,J59noXd"xi©in onixd- 9d& 
ffipa:! tBotodal xiitlw ,0^l4 Io ^k^s odd- d-arfd- Irooaj^X^xI d-silUiiold-xrooxo 

':.tzii ^&iimvp^srl odi' •sn.isii'xodi-STB dtoix d-con " " ■" • bo&sjoor.o 

■r.aixiia^iao'o ,f>©d"aXs:a iots'xo ,3^Xxo ocJ'oib; ci.-. jl;:50 nl d-arid" 

' ••• '.J: .oiiixKi»7^ iJt ^10 ;ig3:«sto!t 13 a i: STjJd-jaci-^j ;; i'.uj ^ ,o*md-cn^J:B bM 



obtfiiiiod by liilsroprosjontaiion, fri2;ail, i'also yrcrbonnionrj an;- eircir> 
vontion; tltit tlic oilLj pa-^ox* proconted to riln I'or r.pproTal or 
©rjceoution at t. '.o time tiio contract v;c,g no.totiatod, T/33 ropro';ontod 
laj a-3»f»el la ' 0. '«'4 g agent to 00 a cinplo contract, and t', t ix such allcTrc: 
protoaclocT .judp^iiont v/^d talion against ap-*ftll€u*t as inaicatoc' by tlio 
allowed protondod or:ocut.lon, tlie oano was end is foaudiilG.rit , and 
sliOTild bo cot acido ^?.s niLll aM roid. 

Tiio bill also EtatoESVon InxorL'is.tioii and Loliof f cvt tlio tv;rni 

of tiie oi2Hr*»* corcrt ■>* oi»4^safi«wa-<*e-«s3fsf» in ,\7' xcli c^aid al ej^od 

i 

protoiided jticl.g.;;o-nt ^r:.?. ontorod, clo;3 id 01a or u"bout .to.-att 1, ISld 
bofoi'e ho hcd. aiiy -"aiOT,'lecI;-^G o:r ';.c rendition 07? t-aeli .Ixiar^'nont ; 
SO tlis.t ho was uaablG to talcc 2^3- otopG by riotiorx or otlxor-vVira to 
havG oaic) ^udrvno : t set af:iu?, or pr:::^ an ap;X:al tnorofron, or ro- 
curo a bill of oxcop" ions Jiirizi": sal3 tcDu, wlioreby Ms ordiioai'y 
romody at lai7 was loet; ■;;iiat t 10 ::^>/iii«ftt ■.vc?^ not at tiie timo 
oi" uhe rondition of saiu Jud-.'-'O ii , nor liar: cinco/oecoi indented 
to t3i» «w >' ;.) e l^ .^».' as set up in ■ aid r.c;t end od juclvp?.ont, and ac allo,":oci 

a: d claij..iod in tlio doclaratian in aid cggi^ "irartr-'tm %"-!€> o^^-ite-'-ss^ 

timt^-aaar ft *— rrirst; y^ -.'S ^ aaid. ^ til" i^,. iiitl^-;;^ ta y^^^s^ni^^a*- i^ tlio^ 

!?iia bin . on -rrayf t'lat tlio alloTod "xa^^enclod G2:ocution and 

lovy bo oot asido, a;d t/i^^t t3ie S'lorij? and r*.vi*«3.1<W( bo rosti: rained 

by oi-dor of court from advert is inf: or ccllin;: too prenineB, or 

authorizing or eaucinr; the na: 10 v.o bo Coni^, or ot:.:.crvYic o at Gnptin • 

to onforoe said ailo,<'?o' protonOed iud";>v.ontiA|H I-^^esK'.rll e^Tiat**t 

"md also prey^ :Co5V €«i -ae- o'Sri-fe «-*»'^»*533r-tiic parties e?io for an-OxV:;r 

en ■* -^ ' ■•'.ing tlio rcrtioB clofGrPciit in •*;:}.o bil_, t:'0 ; .oi'ifrc and rlio 

y 








'ic 




■.-■ -1- 


nXa Orl' wt.XICSO'XQ '^... 








MXOiJ 


•ff»V 




V 






4"o£5T(fx; 










■'j>':o 


n*^ 


1 ^ " , 










r'^B 




- ':';)^(j 




.««.< -^ 


,t>''-.oH?.Sif.£3s:l' si 


: iJiXT) a.qVii', OKfJiji ©iUV -,Jipi^ir00f 








- 








■ ■ ' .■■;.:. 


,..: :,.;: -tflil^.^r^^ XJUai 


IW 











-ore; -sre .tto^c-'reiC^ X^aoroE:. jeBS!igB50|[ .'5C^-- ,,©^4sjE^(d"c 

\ 



appelloG, or Q't'^ox of tlion, xrom furtJior levying saicl allGgod 
protaadocl o:jroc-ation; end. from otlionnrlse onforeiiig, or ati.-.QLiptiiir; 
to onSorce tlio Garao, 

To t■^is "bill the ap;ol'i.oo intorpoced a, doriTurror, wrdcli "Sig 
coiirt Bustainod, and taeroupon onterod an order disniosia^ tlio 
MIj. for tvant of eqiiity, from ivicli order ap ollant proaocutos 
tliis appeal. 

It ap-ooars from tlio "bill tliat tlio oxliioit at aclied to the 



bill as the contract entered iniro — h^:'^9fe&j^_^^ri!€r--:?t!srtiSfyv{o^ ixra- 

"^-—■' — - .-' ^ y^ 

Duma'bly only a i^iart of t}j.o entire contracii* and tm tlae mrt signed 
"by tlic . . ; : tliat evicfently at tl-e canie time apTreHanTT 
signed aiiotlier paoor^WiiJ-oli pi not attached to tlie bilL^/^^rJ^iere 
two papers si;';:ned are a part of t'le ^avae hransaction one sip-ned 
■fay one party to tlio contract, and the other by the other .ari^r 
to tliG contract, hotli papers constitute one contract and are to 
bo considered ao one instm'iorit. ITo reanon Ic givqn vi'hy a cov-^y 
of tho other -art of the cont:.*act, "hich nay Iiave a r.ote aid 
poT7er of attorney, and ths inBtnt-e-it upon v/'iicbi the jud^'i^nent tics 
entered, is not attached to the hill. I'Oreover, tho alT es^^.tions 
in tho hill in :;;'efcron5e to citing such ct^ior insjra'.ent are in- 
consistent, for appellant alle^-oB that if the paocr co-.ta.ins hivS 
signature it is a forgery, "but if t"io flgiiatm-e io j5;ennino io vr >; 
obtai:-ied by inisrepresorfe:,tion, fraud, false protencoj? and circun- 
Tontion. There xz no positive allegation that the nig-.^at-'ro l£ 
a .'orgeiy, nor t':.at tho sif^natirre vzac; genuine, but obtained by 
fraud and jnisro-orc Dentation. ilor are uio. f::.c"bs stated u-oon ■: ieh 
tho claim of 'fraud and misropr cent t ion ai'O bassd, and tre alle- 
gations are cloai'ly inGufficient. "..Iiilo enuity ta::,;D eonc-or ent 



Olid- •^iaulmeit •sofi-jo jkb \B«w:e*a;8 jEtoqifeTSrlt ^fls ^JBonli . oo 

. ■,.>■: •, I'-' ' iie&qas Bhl& 

osi:s 0& BiOdoB'tB d-ioMrixo € IXld ox0 more?: aicse'W :M 

f • pT &ml& a|Baa ^-sxC* d-s Tfrd-ireBJTe {^JCx[d• :^^!r • ^^-^ r'jt ■ - -:'-■ trrf 

htm 9t<m 48 ovjorf -^jiet? rfd^rfw ,*siiG's;i-noo ©."T^ fo.^xJB 
fiGTi ^raass^nt 044- ifoirCvr ixoaxr trcorx^#toi ^d!^ Aka .rssfi'.- . ..■oq 

\ oals^ ,^ifKxa: tirold'xdaeaeicie'rra.f 

-sX.i'S 9 



juriGdiction v;ith lav; coxirts in ' t.ers of frau6. accident or 
mistako, the f-:,cts c o ns t i tut i 30,5 sucli fraud, accident or mistciho, 
as a defense to tlie .xif orce e'lt of a iud^nent , urast oe set oiat 
in the oill. ( Lash or v Anrmsiata, 119 111, 65S). 

lloreovor, to entitle a defen?ant in a r'uc.giient to relief 
against Euch judgrient on tJio ^■:round of fraud, accident or 
mista>:e, it must "oe evident not' only tliat he Im^^ a defense uTJon 
the merits, "but tiiat such doTonBO has iDecn lost to hrn v/ithout 
such loss oeinj attrioutaole to his oan omission, ne::liseneo or 
default, ( I7ard t jl'urham, 134 111. 195) rurtlierv.-iore, it is 

apparent tjiat apoellee had a complete and adequate remedy at law, 
The allegations of the bill do not ahaw aiay valid reason r/hy 

appellant could not rrith ret-'.sona'Dle dilic'snce liavo filed a inot,ion 

.■ '^ 
in the circoiit court of Sangamon county, and upon a proper sh!?f 3,ng 

to the effect "hat his only znowledgo of the entry of the .iudg-, 

ment had come to him after tlie final mdgrrjssrt adjournaent of 

tjie term at vj ich the ,jud'ji:-;ent was entered, have aS'ced the c o^t 

to open the .iudgi.ient and give hiJ^ leave to plead, and rnalie the, 

legal defenses TTiich he claims to have to tlie entry of the 

judjri nt, A in.otion even to vacate a ju6.;'jT,ient filed at the next 

ensuing term after the confession ofa judgnent is in upt tirae, ; 

( Singman v Keinemer, 58 Ill.App, 174) 

And if the mat 'er simply involved an iiTiproper levy of an 
execation his r ,>;iedy vroiild have ix-en by application to tjio coitrt 
isnuinn- the eiseeutlon to quash uhe lev7/, ( Palmer v Crardincr, 
77 111. 143) 

But the purponc of the injunction prayed for is to stay 
proceedings at lau, and the statute requires th- t a bill h.-ving 
such a piirpoce in Yiexr should bo brought in the county v/h:)ro the 
proceedings at la'.T wore liad, which in tlds case is Sangamon 

-6- 



• { .,.,,■,... 

&jfrt tee BO Cassis. , txratc-jBifu -a. lo ;)T'o9;.:soTOxrx. sB^" 6& &aiie1&b 

.(5Ba .III ex.C , sd-sisxnmA t loxiaija: ) .HM ©xia ni 

&sso£&ixi Lilii od" ci"soI no ad" ajSjd op.ao'isio i£oxm tvOxit d"JT<f ,ai'i^©ra exfi" 
«5 GOGssil; ©£[ .aoxaaxflio m'^'C' ^Id o& ^XaQ^ssditifs r:^lBd eeol doxrs 
ei d-1 ,0'c- ■ -^-cir (sex .III ^^1 \s!iM:xssa v J5xBv; ) .cMxr •-- 

• '■' " ■■^■'\?o'£ joiisT igfii^ wAife uOfi oB Ilid err;^'•'■'" ,..- : ,,..- -r 

;,2jjt orU-'lb -^^ne exidf- lo ogBQlvroxnT -^Ino alx£ fBdf i-oelxt) -.. 
lib i'flsfiirmfoti^fi ^Ksffi^lftBf. Xsrill exfS- IotIb iniji od" emco ':"" 

y:x9ri surf;}- Jfe h&in - -• '^--f; s ad-jsoav od- neve hoIj-oct A .- 
•aarJtc^ j-c[J3 ixi ei ..,_., .^J; x:lo noleesthnoo eifd" •red^ nriod^ 

(j^Vl ,qq:A.III 83 ,'r9fK©jile5I v n^;.. , . 
Its 1:0 ^el -isqo^iqmi xts BstIovhI TjXccmls t£>-!im edf "±1 haA 
jifroo oxT* c ^< ;.' ' r ,x tj^j nocxf ovM Bitfow •^entorr alrf iroid-ijc...- _ - 

«"xsaJL5tx3i > *^©I he'd xfajeirp od- nold-jjooa:© errd- ^j<-lirBsi- 

(SM .in VV 
^fct-Jd-e gk)- si toi ;.D-^Biq nold-ooxftai orl* lo daoqTCXjq ©rfd" *M 
r^jT:rf IHcf B d-.'iiid- seiixygo-i 9&xr^afa eh'& baa ,wsX -■<- o ,-^^v-r:^^.-,'^^- 
■•.r •:+Jxr^od a^d- ui d-rfsxrorrtf ocJ .DXirOriB wolv r- ? _ . 



comity. '2hQ circuit court of Zendiill conn-tyr, therefore, liaC no- 
J-ariBdiction to entertain tlio bill, evon t'louijli the 'oiil li;?£ 
containocL sufficiGnt aver .lents to give a;o reliant a stenuing in a 
coitrt 01 equity. 

Tor tL.o reasons stated we are of opinion that the demurrer 
was properly sustained, and that the court did .''ot err in ci.-- 
inissin;S the "bill. 

Decree affir ed. 






J&srl Hid ©xfd-, j%troxld- JC£07^ ,XI±cf erf^ riJtBuT©urs©. o;t irold-oxiairnjt 
3 Hi s^iljiXGd a & djctaXICK q£ 8Vi^ od" ad-nerr-sTB d-ixoloi'tlira bosxls&tsoo 
- -.-• .. ^- r < •T!;J^iiJpe 1o chaxoo 

TS'nimsb exlcr &Bd:^ xxoxulqo to 9'is aw fi&d■J5^^s anoseoT 

-3XD al TI9 d-Off btb drtxroo o ' , fianisd'axre ■\5X'3Bq;oiq[ aew 



»J5a.i.niljts ss'xoeGC 



J ;•?•,;;_■; 



c^f/oTv ''y. 



-V- 



.Ilicf C: .:in 



-1 ; 



;;'P- ■■,.::" 






STATE OF ILLINOIS, |_ 

SECOND DISTIUCT. \ ^^' I. CHRISTOPHER 0. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 
seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this _ 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clei-k of the Ajypellate Court. 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 

Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 

/ 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine/ hundred and sixteen, 

within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 

Pr8sent--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justicge. 

Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Jus tile. 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. 9* "^ A.* '3 9 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
APP 1 4 1916 the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



Gsn. No. 5197. 

August Cellar! us, S^c * aupellani; . 

V8 A >c3al iron'. ?:^ill6 

Amanda Junker, appellee, 

Niehaus, J» y^ 

In-tiils case, -^y4»ij.l in ecuity >.rr3 filsd by Aug,;Dt Cil- 
le.rius, in his individual capacity, --nd csi, aditinistrn^^or of 
tiie 33tate of Y/illiam C^llariua, ^.cainet A^rianda Junlrer, ai9^11-e<r' 
to hQt 'ioide a j'aange of beneficiary m-id?. by yha d^caassd, for 
the bsnsfit of 4^&«14e*, in two ,lita ina-jronoa policias, 
and to snjoin the paytrignt of ths pdlioisa to ag;7*li?e*f-, '^^'' 
*»-' The bill ailsge&^that \^illiam Cellariua, the .'"'^oeaasd 
had ta.:en o»« life ii-s^urance policy in r^e National Lif® 



Asacciation, o ' DaaMoineg, "or ^3,CC0 in Y^-i"-"^ appellant, the 
brother of the dsoeased, had originally beeh nrr::ed as benefi- 
ciary; and anothar policy had b-,:5n taPen out by tha deceased, 
in the Ne-;v York Life Irsurance Company, for *-hevj.U!r 61 ,"'1000 
in -.vhich the moth-';r c;" the dexjeaaed Mary Csllarius, ?i'S'!i-cri- 
ginally been n med as csneficiary; that Mary Cellarius .'isd 
about four yenrs prior to -^he filinc: of 'hs. bill.; and that 
by a change ir^ tha beneficiary, these ocliciss ■■jad hscc're 
payable to the app.e-n*€, ind 'vsre in sffsct ao signed to hsr, 
and that the ieceaaed, in his rfequeat for tho chances cf 
bsnefioiary, had de3ic;nated at»p«4lAe ae hie "Fiancce"JJ 

The -Ti^:! a>e© o.rtnrcje<rflf'''^:hat "he change in ':he beneficiary 

/■ - 
or a3aign;nents of the policiea, Arsre crocured by the aoj> ^ll *-e 

through fraud '-nd undue inflL)3nc£; tlsc, that the dscsaGrja 

did not have, at '"he ti.ne of tr.akin?, -"'iie ::han'r'3s msntionsd 

aufricient .rental capacity for the transaction cf ordinary 

businssa. The fraud chareed, is th.at a;>;N«H.l-e« prctsndsi to 



.tits',.. . Sil «a0ia£XXeO *sjj'^jj-A 

► i :: i : -, :• -i , T 3>'nwL jibn^mA 

s-^^.-e^r^-ii .xe^sfm/L jsJbiTJSiEA rf'sr x -^ ■ , t/jii.'^: . -0 rr^i^^X^i?? ^o s*£--d-ae sr.t 

lo': ttts.£QOrit srfy ycf eJbrm 'fiisiciiarr^'D lo sj^ns.:;-.. *• 3i3Xo£ Jos oJ 

^aeiciXoq eoniTix,'eni e'liX.owi- nl ,'ii«i4*^- ' "":;;;.-'' ertJ 

' - -■^ >'* ."— -9r^f*rf^ of eslcili:' ' "c d'n£m\f£tq ecu x7.'o;,ne or chjs 

■.5ei?sor" '■ .^i/ii^i.CsO i\u^:...z' ■:?'jsri.+ ''*fa9s©Xi js Xllci sr.'T -^ 

£. : «: ^^ cq-oB rfoirfy ni 000, c.| lo'i ,»snJtoMesa ::o tfioi;tjBlcc'6aA 
OOOXv !tf\~iBua>srf-» T^l: .^nfiqaoO obajsiu^al slid itpY wsK ed& at 

:' '.'.'£ jJ-If^ ■ " " 1 rfaJtXi* Oflt of lotir 6'ij<b^ tj;o' ;fi;ocfjS 

,■1^:. cj- i)engli;Q^ tos"'* nA eie^" .one , »» J £ ftiyi.n- Sff^ o.t eXaB\f£q 
":o aern-Frfc «rft '-o'i ^6?:^ -vi aJfc jJoeBjesoet si::f ;t^ri.t ijn^ 

' ------- a^.i^-... v.r.. ,^ 3\T.t' 9:.'' te , evisn J-on bit 

- ■-■-■^- x^loJiqjiO lAiati'ti iriQtzlZliJB 



be in lovs with -the deceased at tbs tinsej and -y misrepre- 
sentation and deceit in that rsgard, ahe unduly influenced 
the deceased, and by these rethods cv^used him to .nake the 
changes. 

Issues of -fact Tjere made up, and submitted to a i'ory 
and the j'-ry returnsd a vsrdiot, finding againat the oontsnticn 



and entersd a decree finding +hat a^^c^-ii.- :?~3 the affianodd 
wife of the deceased, and as beneficiary of the policies, 
T7as entitled to the proceeds thereof^ 7/hish proceeds, Ijy^ 
st-ipttistiiflU^. hsuL -b^e^fi paid i-rrttr-th-e hands of th*- -rt5scst-frr' trr- — 
o-hsyao-^*y-| -anrrd-'-f'rem this 'i^coee an .anpsal is prossr.uted« 

There >5»4 no question rajasd ?.n "-he c^se as to "-he r;(jij~ 
larity cf the change cf beneficiary or aasirnm^nt} it being 
stipulated by the parties, that the policies were .luly assigned 
to the a^iwM-li*« in con'^crrr.ity with ths rules -ind regulations 
of the respective irsuranoe corrio'=nieiB» 

There 'W no 2Vi:^.ence ir the record to sustain the charges 
made in the bill, cf fraud cr urdue influc-nce; but there ia-*#^ *^ 
evidence ter.din;:' to show that the deceased, at 'he tixe cf 
making the change of beneficiary, was rr.pntally ir.ccmf.etent; 
a nvujiber of witnesses t'^stified that the Jecsaaed, about the 
time he f':ade the change, was incapacitated for the transaction 
cf ordinary business; but there is a conflict in t>.e evidence 
on that question. The deceased had had a strohe of apoplexy 
in December 1816, prior to staking he change, ^^hich had con- 
fined him to the house and bed for several -.vseks; but there- 
after he v/as up and a'round, and jitt-.nded to some business; 
and in LCay 1313, hs he.d another stroke, frorr. the ef "sots cf 
which he died. The c"-ange of bGneficiary was n-.np'e on April 
18th. and April £5th. respectively; that is to say, bet-iveen . 



-aiqeislsK yrf Jbaa jemit erf* ts tee^sosij eri* rirf-iw svoX ni etf 

YOi-ff; jp. oi' bet:^lct'.ciue bcis «qt; SJb^m siceTr *::.:c^'?: ^o ssjjscT 

rcoJf IrraJfloc srf."^ f6nt£v.£ ■gciltm'^ ^*^ttTr izut^n v: ^ Lr.x 



--./■'- /. . ■ . . . 

esgi-srio srfcl' aifiit^x/e o:t Jbipr orr ■^n?' STSrfT 



■\ 



*N»>^ 



*?: ta ,-b38J6ec .tbnst 90/isfcivs 

rtciifOJJsfrr .... 

e one . s^erfj' tuc^ jeeerxiaud" yt.s 



YX9.f{oqB TO ??fo 



^n aVrt"" 



:sc.'m&o?'I al 



-lei z^^' 



vi^tcecraea .dd^Sc: Il-xcrA inj' .rid-ei 



the first Btrcks of :ipoplexy which the deceased e-^ffered cno 
the second one, from which he iiedo 

From the eviier.cs shewing mental capacity, :'.t z.: ,^*^^J^ 
that he Riade the ar""ar.^;eif.ent3 for a chan.;rs cf csnef ioiJ^ry, 
after us had suf -ioiantiy reccvsred from tne btroke to oe ,^p 
and aroiu-d; he had rosoaned hia nabit of goin-; to a certain 
3tore, '.vhere*lie vvouli rsad tne Chicago Tribune nearly c-vary 
day, and couid talk aaout things, about as v.sii as usual, 
except tfiat hiu 5::ssak was leoe diati:ot than ocAor ^ the 
stroke; tl.at luring this ti?:]®, hs went to another store, and 
bought articles, /vhich h& wisncd to uae, ana talked tventy 
or thirty ininutes with the hosper ci" the store, and v.-pearad 
to be rational ar.d c.enta:..ly coirit-'fetsnt; t.'.at he .T.et psopls en 
the streot, occaaiona_iy, and t?.lked with them; froir. ti.Te 
to tiiu©, went to hie physician's office ior treatment. It 
;/i30 appsars, that ehcrtly oeicri he tvas strioicen :he first 
tiri:e,,hs had cclieot^d a^veral huts cf n:oney, due from j.-n.cc-re 
of a oenevolent jpciety of which he was an c^ficer, but 
had not turned the money in to tne Society, nci piven the 
naaaa o..- 'ho rs.embera who had paid it; but aftr. r hs had suf- 
ficiently recovered to Vial^ about, ne /vent to the oicycr cftlc*r 
gave the nainoa cf tne parties, ■-..nd turnc-a in tne iiioney. he 
also '.vent to different place i; where he cved bills, md c'.id 
them, ?b- 

"In a cae*e of thia character, where -..itneBees differ a.s to 
the , mental oapao-ty of the 5ran for and cf his ability to irjally 
transact business r.nd to j.ispoee oi his pro jsrty, the weight i 
to be given to fAe testimony of *hs wxtncaaes ia wuch inore 
readily to be deterrained by a j^st chanceiicr than by a cou/j 
of review, Trhich r^adb only the written evidence. The la-.v is 
v/cll eatablished in this state, that vjhars a cauee is hiard 
by the chancellor, and the evidence is all, or cartly, ora3., 



,1581911:.' 



i^:t:j i.:;oo3< 






ajZ." .C8iX."-. s ^^ i.i^,J.^::.!^:^Q tJi 






r 



it -T.uBt apnear that tlisr- is a clear and palpable sr-'i-cr be- 
fore a r~ver9al -.vill bs ^.^.d.. In a case of thia c:"araC'^3--, 
v.'here t':.e i£;3ue Is tried by tr.e c':i'.'.ri;;e."".lor \)3fore a ^'ur; , and 
where 'he ver"3ict of the ;ury is only aivlaory -■.'..'1 -ray ct 
set 5.3iie by the chancellor, the rule shoull be :^>'jct sa strong 
that c' ear and palpable error 3hou3ii appear hefcr: "-he le.rae 
should be reversed." (Bie.?erstax'"f v Bihhc-retaf-"', 13C 111. ;07.] 

"It hr.s h?;en v.-ieely settled in char.cery casea, that a 
court of rsview will not disturb -^-le firding cf fact cf the 
chancslior, unless 'v.rarert error has b-i-en oc^nn.ittsdj and 
the rule thus arnouncsd a-'plies vith full force although tiie 
ohanoe.lior has eubrr.itt?d toe c'^;.se to a jury fcr an advijcvy 
vsrdict," (Lewie ^ hriaccll, iC3 Til, 490; Flrr-atadt v 
Nicholson, 186 111. 580.) It ia not a^^ 'irent froc: the raccrd 
that any error was coioniitted by th ■ ohancsllor in "ustaining 
this findings of fact in tns verdict of t]i8 ^ury; r.nd it is 
manifeBt, that while there is a conflict in the- svilence upon 
the question of ""hs rr.ental capacity cf the. aeoaasad, "^hire 
is sufficient eviasnce to prove, that he waa c?vpable zz trans- 
actirg or Jir-jary buainsaa at ^hf, time cf ^hs ast.-ignrr.cnt cf the 
p^iiciaa. 

Aoceilant also asaertfc. that the evilc-ncs tc at.cy that 
the appellee v^aa the fiancee cf the decsaaee, i-^^ inau ficient; 
but .v9 are of opinion that •'■h'= r:cori iisclosgs 2u;"i3i£.nt 
proof, *hat prior tc th3 aaaignTi^^nta of tlie inauranca policies, 
ths deceased had boen sngajed to :e married '-c appellee, aud 
that this enTajement vaa tne real Tctivs 'or riahing the 
asaignnaent cf the insurance csnefita tc ■'-pnellee. 

It"'Trs"'Ri#^ i^-vfcisied t-i»*j/the court 9¥»«4 i* excludi5-jf<^ 
evidence tc ahow that ao^oilaa was playin^ cards, iau£;hin2 and 
having a good time ia tii* -^a^a* of M^e-» 5^p-ed"<3«l-l«wc4«sH j^st 



* ^ -.-.y^ J! w - i 



lit 



.;, .; ;- iVix<; :.ii.: ^ '...wo v.-^t .OTIS ^X: 

_.,^,, ....-4 ^^ ^0i|inoo. 45 ^^ wi.ai'd' dlin'sv v^^rij ^Je ......— .: 



. £oq 

fiJBiJLJBri ©i; . :■. --■!''■■ .ii>i.c.w.,c • -••' ->+ •^■-^■■■^ *Fd^. t *. . ,. 



"2^ 



■I 



/ 



u._ / > 



i v^ 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATf COURT, 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, th| fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nfne hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District o| the State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Jus I ice. 

Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. 

' I 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Cl^erk. ^. U 1/ 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. / 



'^ /g ir\ ^ 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

APP 7 / 101C the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



. ■O V i ^ a U \j 



=i<*t>'S,'»!nr? »CRi 



Gen. Ho. o314. 

Wiiliarr, Rako, appollse. 

va Appsal ."rrom Kans« 

E. J. & E. Ry. Co. appellant. 

Ki=hau3, J« 

Thiu is an aooeal in a case co.rarencGd by the appell33 
William Kako. in i-hs Ciroi:it Court cf Zzx.s County, a^jain^t 
t:ie appsllant Elgin, Jciiet & E-iotsm Railv/ay Coir.pany, and 
G. Holland, to r /.cover daTr.ages sustained by appel'Jce, becauae 
of the death and siokiisso of £-:on-.e ci" hi-? ooV'S, v.Lich v/as 
cauaed as the reauj-t cf certain neglii^once; cliarcsd In ap- 
pellee's declaration. 

Jl\^ The declaration ij^ct*iwte qI an oi-iginal ".r.d an ajtaitional—^ 
aovAftt-, in both ci which it i© alleged tl:at the •^■p|ja.ld«#„ aad 
one G. Kolland, who wa* also a defcsndant in the trial court 
were in pcsaecsion oi adjoining properties, 'vhioh -vere sep- 
arated by a dividion fsnce; taat these r-ropertisa ioinad 

t' 

tc ^he rigrxt of way oT ths api!»eilawt Railway Company. T-::^"^ 

was ths iuty of the detsndant Holland, to maintain thD di'/ision 
fsnoe bstwean the cropertiss, in proper oonJition, and thai 
notwithdtandinr; auch duiy-, '""^ perrr.ittsi said fence to bso&rrie 
out 0-1' .-^i.air, an.l continue out oi repair, until it becamfc 
Ae« T »^ Q«4 l-a41 do-Wftf- and -^liat "^he defendant Railr/ay Ccfupany 
nsgliggntly injured and damagea said division fence, -.nd 
wrongfully removed said diviBlcn r.nce, cr parts tl^er&ofj 
that in conescusncs i:h3rsof, the cattel of said plaintiff 
got into the close of "".hs defendant Holland, and tliere coneumad 
the green ocrn growing therein, whereby thsy were injured. 

To each ox the counts in ths declaration, the appellant 
and Holland pleaded the [general i:. sue, and a special plea, j.pon 
which iaeues tliS case Tras tried. 



• ©xmK iBOTl XjssqqA ev 

.tnfiXIsqci: .oO .\F: .- ;^ .L .1 

ssiXeqqjB srf^f vcf Jbsonammoo ©sjao js at X^9q.".i? njs ex eiriT 

boiJz ,i{aJ3q.T!oO ^JswiJ:^<H n:is;tsx^3 :& tBtloZ ,nigX3 i-xiJEjIXscqjB srld" 

9eij£09cf «99lX8qqj3 Ycf iDsnJij^JsiJo esgjsfltici: te©voosi oi «Jbae;XXoR .0 

Ba3W xloiiiw ,tt\yoo eJtrf io smoe lo BBsnafoie bn^ di^eb ecit lo 

-q>s al XjsgtJBuo s6'nas"Ms^n nijaJlso' 'lo .fXifKre-r ' e£;f -a^r i?e«-jj^o 

Vfl6i*J8TSj?0©i> e'BsXXsq 

• o -<wt**»e**« aoX*B-ij8l03i5 erfT ^^^ 

tfir ^S^B f frai-jf^ ^dc^ ;f«srlct JbagaXX^tta-i- ».£^ -rf^o^wfa. 'a i ia. .. d»o < a" -flhU - y ^ f W d c 

Xj&..fc-a4- « fi -«. . ftJ; > • ^ - n a^ bne ^a .b, .a. gg .. L " j » .-^rf^^ -^aV «Jbn£XIoH .0 erro 

-(§©B sisv; rioxrfw ,B©id'asqoiq 3ninio(;i)JB lo aoxssaseoq al aisw 

JbQuioi; eslJ-Tsqottq ©e©ri^ d'^ri.l t©on;©l aoi:bivii> c yd Xjerf'js-ifi 

i^*~-*w-t? ,Yn<eqfr:oO ^jBwXixrH (hwrf-i-eSii^ srij- lo ifjsw lo JrlgXi ©rid o* 

noieivijb scTT^-ctXettil^r. 0v^• «LrrJ8iXoE JnjE5£>nsl©t Sil:^ lo Ycfut :a" 8J3w 

jjBrit iin-e ,noi:ii;tnoc"'TPS^jQ:iq rci ,e£xrf-asqoiq ©rfcf- naewi-so ©onsl 

Bfiiiosd OCT ©onsx bts^B iQi-iitsneqB^^c'iijjtdouB ^altnBtedtlvtoa 

©aiJBosd tl itjiiu tii^qsi lo &iJQ suniunoo LoS^'T'^'^USl;? j^'^ *J-fO 

YrcBqiTioD ^jawXi^H ;tnx<tn&l.©J[5 adS tjeif"" i>aB it< iy ci..X4»^ - i: ' **u X>e ' j. - ^'o] i 

bnr. «©on9l aolQlvtt t>i^a JD©3«mj3Jb brus £i3ijj(;n2 ^X^n&siXgsn 

jloeiecfct a^ijR^f lo t©onsl noJiaivifc bifia i^avoMsi Yllulynoiv. 

llitni-elq il^^s lo leifj'so ©rf:f ,lo©i9riJ- sonax/psenoc rri i-jsr..- 

i>emuenoo ©isrfif i)ais ,i>n£lIoH *nBibn9laJE: arfj lo ©eoXc srf;J oJ^ni J'o 

..'-si.i.-rni: sasw ysrlt ';cf9i£^ '• ,*iisisri.+ gniwoag aioc aasag Sii;t 

:di tnoiJ-vBiJalo©/) srf:'" nX acfnwoo edt lo rfojBS oT 

no V ,^£Xq Xri-:.v «8xja-^X Xiiasao" ©rl:f X)di)J8©Xq XinilXoH ijflis 



At the close of tbs eviienoe for tus accellae, the ap 
psllant .r.,'idi a moticn to direct a verdict •fildin:^: t\\e ^irpllant 
not guilty, ^vhioli motion \'.'a3 overruled] ?.nd the s.-p2liar. t, at 
the cloas ci all the evidence in ^he case, T?ne-;v£d t'-.e rriotion 
to iircct a verdict of not -uilty, .■.hi^h r'^.s ^.rain overruled 
by the court. A vgrdict 7?afo thereafter returned by 'he jury, 
finding the a:.pell?'r.t £-uilty, :.nd assessing plaintiff's dan-ar^ea 
at the auc! of |400; and findinr; the defendant C-e Holland, 
not guilty. A mction /or a nev.- trial, ind in arrset o£ iudgment 
Y.'eri :T:ade oy the appellant, ?.r.d overruled by ths cou-t] ?nd a 
judgment thereupon entered for C^CX^ arair.st the apoellar't 
froffi T^hich judgaient the appeal is ta>ene 

/Y" The proof dhows, t'.at the appelles was a dairy farmer 
and owned a number of cowa; :hat ':he33 co.rs had been turned 
into a field whioh adjoined a corn "isld owned by Holland; 
that ths corn Jield '.vaa separated from appelleelta premises, by 
a division fence. This division fence ^7a9 .rsdf by poets s-t 
in the "ground, ^.nd v.iree strung along, :nd fa^tensd to the posts] 
and it -..as built up aiosely to the line of •».--r'^llant'^4 right cf 
way, but j.id not join onto ^r.e right of way fence. 

Ths evidence ter.ds to show, that -^ha di-Hsicn femce, at 
the tiiTie "he cows get i'to tne Holland corn 'ield, -v^a partly 
broken dcvm] and that one or two oi the poets ho^ iin^ the 
'.vires, had bsen pulled up:.nd thrown Jown, with the wires 
attaohscL, on the land of the^'^p-WlLaa, .vhich m-r-de ". euf : i- 
cient o.:ening for ■■.hs cov/s to s;.et into the HoJland field] and 
that -hile in ther©, the cows over-fed on the 2:rsen corn; 
that in consequence, two of the co^vs died, ar,d a number of 
them beca.re cick, -n:. were injured to such extent as to become 
less Tzaluable. But the record 3oas not disclose any evidence 
tending to paxprovs that ap^l-i^at v/as j^uilty of the negli- 
gence charged in the declaration. 



t:2 ,:faj5ll3qrjs arf:* bn.e {beiUTiBVO ej3W noi^om ricJtri'^ t^dlij- 
ttoticv. 9f.& issvrsne'lr ,SSB0 erft rri sons£>ivs srft IIjb lb sso^ 

tn?K^fcut lo Jasatr^ ni tn.s tXjsiit wan «e.lo'i aoi^om.A jU^XijJsJ-oxi 

* bcv. {t-uOQ sriit YCf JteXx/i^SYQ Jbn^ .,«i'-':£XX9qqjs-S£td /^d eJi>sffi;si5.> 

*nr«XIaqqja..^rIl *enl£sje .00*^ 10,1 Jba-reJiia aoqjJS'XQrfi ^•rt3:ia£>W(; 

. J'^^ 'vwvns;ij6>f ei X^eqq^ Qd&. tnsc^Xuji; iiox4'y MO.** 

-^ ■» • --^ * ■ • - ■■■ -'' ■"■■■,'" 

jijn^rXoK -o ^Xell nioo. jp JbsrjioxX)* .rf-Oi^w X^Xeil « odti\X 

^cf ,8861.11970 iJjiaXidit^saviao'rl b.pd-&i&!:iBia a£w tXaii nnoo ©4i ^f--"'- 
t-*B a^eoq ^cf afii'ffi e^w aons^ noisxvXt sXriT .soiiel aoieivlL *3 
•Btsoq 9rf,t o? Jb9^t9c^eJ8l Jbn.3 cgnoljc gni/id- a , as zivif ^^e ^»Jbjiu/ox2 ^^^t id-t 



.;c-;?': ^-sw lo :^r[3i•I, eii;i- <xtao zioQ ^on £)lr- cfijo «^i6w 

'{X+a^q 6J?r jJbXei" ntoo bciAlloE edf'ot'^X-^o^ awoo ^dS- Qtzii si-" 

Sifj- snXJbTori a^-eoq »rl't "io owJ- xo sno tsrl^ bcu itngb ae^9%d: 

aa-xiw sdl rf*xw ,niroL nwoiAj- txiirqjj X)aXXjtf^iie£cf i)^xi ..aa.-ji:'- 

-1 Ije r 9ti?(n rfoiriw ,aLftii4^-^\srid lo ijnsXeti^ no ,£)eao£o' :'-•; 

Jbn£ ;JbX©2l trtelloH erf^ o;*ni tsQ o* ewoc di-ij ao'i jnine.;© *asi^^ 

iff:too fxseis srf;f no Jbal-aevo ewoo axfit, ^dxad-i aX •XXd*" **- 

"lyn js JbfTB iibexfc ewoo ,^dt lo owi- ,ecnsiJpsanoc nl is i 

fl :ooed o^ 8£ *^9:^x9 rfoua oit i)eiJL/(;nl ai©T.' cnc ,2tois sx^sscj ojs.. .' 

aoaaJfclv© ij.-- .ib ;tc:.: locei e4i *x;a .eXcf^uXjssf eeeX 



The only evidence T/hich connected the e,g»'pe 1 leorb with 
the matt^-r at^-aJ-i, is to the effect, that abcut 3 w351;b prior to 
the tinre :\'hen tn?. cows hscarr.G sick, seme cf ae«pQllant*« Tenoe 
buildsrs had -.vcrksd en the right of v.'s,y fence, at the plaee 
in c^uestlcn; ^nd had substitutsd woven .vira for 'he barbed 
v'ire on tr.e right cf v;ay f 5ncej but there i^ nothing in the 
evidence to Justify the inference t":~at this •-voriL by the 
employes cf the agii^€4**?Tt , ccuia c../:^ lid the sffeot, even 
if it r-ers neglisrently p3rformad, to in any .'ri-anner intsr- 
fere with or disturb, or break down the division Tsnoe, 
'.Thioh was entirely disconnected froai the right of 'v'iay fence; 

nor could it possibly have had the effect of pulling out any 
of the peats of the division fence. And the oositive evidence 
all^'^^^S^ to .^hcw, that the employes did not in any way cause 
any oC the peats of the division fence to be pullad out, nor 
cause any of the posts to fall 'own or break icrn; or to be 
interfered v;ith, or diaturbed in any jrannar. /"■'- 

Under thsae oiroumsta-ncea there can be no r^scovery a-ainat 

the appellants; and the Judgment therefore ia reversed. 

Judgment reversed. 

Finding of Facts to he incorporated in -he Judgment. 

^e find from '-he evidence that the appellant -^v^.^ not -^uilty 
of the neglicronoo char(?ed in the declaration* . 



- o* ;toi^ ais3w £ d;.0QCfi? Jijff.:!- ^toslls sxf# o* ei^« .-iiA-**. rre**fim silt 

ssjBlq. ef.± ^£ tSonsl ^-sw ^o trfs-t'i exid; no Jbsiiov: bsd. BietLlud 
fcscfXGo' 9ri' lol 81-tw flsvow isi-u J" Jttf-scfue jbjsrf l)ns ;riolj8Sijp ni 

«rfj- v;d; ii:ow ej^rf.+ ctjs-it aoneislni scTd- ^liiJ-ejirt o* eorrstivQ 

,dOflel noi?i:v4£) srij xswob tsf^sid no «cfT0d'8lb lo dd-Jtw s:ce'i 
jQonsi Y<sK' lo J-rfgir -■ -^ '^'oil £)©d-09cinoq8l& Y-ts^-t^ns a^v? rfoxriw 

xn£ d-jjo sniXXx/q ^o v\,.--^w sxld- iijsrf sv^I YXcflaepq ti JbXi/oc ,ion 
sonsJfc'XVS »vJtd-xeoq ©ri:- bnh *sonsl- noiaivllj sili- lo a*eoq er:+ 'o 
oey^o ^^^K y,a^,ait(;^i^ ,blb asYoXqaie- ©ri;?- d'Jsrf* tWc^-- -?' — ns". ., 

xoR ,itjyo' IJ^XIuq scf' od- eorie'i.noielvit srfj- lo Bc^t Y-~ 

i.etf .-Q;^ . 10 . iflwot 3{^sid Tp.awoF;^XXfit. Oit §iJ:eoq sff:' -^ ...- i.wi;£o 

•fceeiev©!: s|^ ©lo'io'xs^d' ^nsm^jit ©^^ |)5r..6iefnjsXJsc >•:... -..v 

.. - . , . . .,*JE>^ar£©ya? •ln:9raai>uTi ■^• 

.^ ,., «dn©ra8Jbxf.L eri:!, nX J£)©:hj5ioqiopni ^. vci ecf-o"'^ "" '^ -.-,tfr, .■■t 

Y*X1j/j; Jorr 'bxsl" tfijsX'Xeqcfi erf:?- ^jQifd ■ ©DXiftiiiv© effc^-■lHOl!t•'^■£>■n■ll sW 
. »fsroi';}'«'x»Xt>®'Jfe- ©tfj- iri Jb^^we^flo ©orto^lX^sfr-eiC* lo 






STATE OF ILLINOIS, | _ 

SECOND DISTRICT. ( ''*^' I, CHRISTOPHER O. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Coui-t in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this^ 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine himdred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



./. « ■ 



OU4i:^ 




AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of th'e State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon, JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justicf, 

! Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justii. O f\ f\ ^^ f\ A r\ €^~ 

I <^ KJ \J jL.rla ^ O ^ 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk( 

I 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. f 



% 



'^•r . . -^ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
--.'"h' ] 4 19)g ^^® opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wi t : 



. .--oiizul .2SP:SA0 '.L aWAUQ .noE 

:'^ /"•:6oU80L ,,iJ3aia soKAsaoa .noK 

.l^.XTsde' ,8IVAQ .M .a 






Gen. Np. 6042. 

William Fl3ming^--at- aJ.- /" 

appslleea. 
VQ A •poal frcm Will. 

E. J. & F. Ry. Cc. 

appellant. 

PER CURIAM: 

One cl tliS Jud^:es of this jourt triel thia oauae 
in tue court belov*-; and ti-ie ctner tr/o iudgea are dividsd 
in opinion upon the qut-^stion 'A;h=:-ohor the judgment should ba 
affirmed or reversed; the ^udgaoiit i3 therefore affirmed by 
operation of lar/« 

Binder v Langhorst, lo9 Ij.1. App. 4S3. 



A ^£- i.ir-^~^pJii!Xt;il. rruaiXixTJ 

,IIiW aroT^ X4i:3q- A . bv 

.00 .^fi .3 A .L .3 
.irrjslleqqjs 

:MIHU0 ffa*? 
©BUBO Bin'd- tQl-ii i-'.uoc eiri.t lo asstul. sdi lo snC 

.W£l lo noid"£:c6qo 
.SSt^ .qqA *III t'Ci .d'siorfgnjJJ v isiinia 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, \ _ 

SECOND DISTPJCT. \ '^^' I. CHRISTOPHER C. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoincr is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 







AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COUjRT, 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justic^f 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerfe! _- /. "l 
, E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. f^ "^ '^ "*" "^ 



^''»-««S#"'^ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
APR2..Di3iO ^Yie opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



■■"■'" jjjT. ~^V. -C t; .r 2 7-'; 
.'-Of -yuL 



Gbq . :To . G168 

Edward B. Kreia, appellant 

V3 Appeal iron: "Reck Island. 

The Cou.ity of Rock loland. st al 

appsllees. 
Di\3ell, P. J. ' 

n ;A.rd E. Kr-iii, s. citiasn, r?al sst-ite c ;ner and 
tax payer of the city of Hock Island, filsJ a bill in e^-iuity 
against the Ccur.ty cf Rook Inland, its sucsrvisora ?.nd its 
jail ouiiding committee, to enjoin the ecu ity from building a 
ns'.v jail on the vrest aide of tl^e public 3nuar©, and g^.ve 
notice to delendants of an i;plic?.ticn for a tem/orary 
injunction. Defendants apoe^rei and filsd affidavits denying 
many of the allegations of the bill, Complair;4nt nncvsd 
for a rule on iefendcinta to plead, ana-.ver or demur before the 
motion for an injunction -.T-^.a heard, and alao rrovei to strike 
the affidavits filed by dsfend^-nts rrorr. the "iles. Each T,otion 
was denied; the court heard the nioticn for ?.n injunction 
U'on th2 bill and 3,ffidavits and denied the rrotion and dis- 
missed the bill. The o^ffidavics and exhibits thereto -/lere 
preserved by a certificate of evidence, Cofjjplainant arpeal* 
f3?«»~tharfe decree* 

Mnne, Catholic Bishop, va The County of Rock Island, 
in which tne auproms court filed ■■ui opinion on April 3C, 1916 

7/5.3 a simiajT oill for the same relief, and +he record in 
thio case shews that the motion for -n injunction in the 
Dunne case was ^et for the spjce day as the inotion in this 
case. In that cnse the court denied motions to compel the 
defend.ants to plead and to strike affidavits filsd by the 
defendants from the files, and dismissed the bill. In that 
case the affidavits vfer^ contradictory to the bill, and it 



8SXG .0^1 .flfiO 

.Jbnjslsl afooH oioxl IJsaqqA ev 

L£ *3 .I>njsl6l 3I00H 'io x*«J^o'3 SJ^T 

.L .1^ ,XIstfiCi 

Xiivpe ttl Xlitf u3 cQlil ,£)n«aXeI ::fooH ^o ^*io Bd& 10 is^^q xsd" 
Si-i bns' aroeivisque ei-i ,JbrrjsXBl iooH lo xtcmoO sdi tsnX/:gi) 

8Vj?3 £jr!£ ^9'X£up6 oiXcfixq SifJ- lo si:ie *89w sxfJ no Xljsj; wsn 
Y-JStO' Jirsi £ "rol nojt;tjsc;i:Xqq^. n£ lo a;^n£Jbfr9'i9Jb oJ- soid-on 

Jbevoco In*ai5lqmo0 .XXicf exit ^:o enoit^ssIXe sxfd- lo ifrr^m 

erfd- s'loled lijiii&b to lawAnis ,Jb489Xq oS etiiBJbnslei) no sXifi J3 -xol 

ejfi'rd-e od- revom oeX.s baB ^brsed ejBw noi:cl-oni;i;ni rrs ao^ noiooaj 

noljO.T riosjf .eeXx": srfi- moil aJfusfcaslsfc ycf toXi'i sttv^btlls sdi 

noi?of£U(;ni ob fo^ aot&om edf btsisd d-iuoo srf^ jJbeixTSt aiaw 

-ar£) fcor noitom ©rfif belUBt Ln& uitV£bi.ll£ ban XXXd srid- no'iJJ 

819W o.t&isr'd- etltflrfx© bn£ BJJtv^fcillB sxiT »XXid &.ld- bQ&alai 

. ftj;< a 8 c. ^^-4 flaflij)JoifloG n'.eonsi;Xvs ^o a^^oiliiisc s. ycf tavaeee^q 

,ta^X£l iooH "is y^^J^oO ©fiT ev ^qodQlB. oxXorfd-^O ,snnjira 

&X5X ,0£ XJtticA ao nolain© nj* beXll J-ii/oc effleiqwe erf* iloirfw al 

ci trcosT erfribfTB ^leiXoa ©ame 3rf* lol XXlc' T»Xmi3 r- e.ew 

adi at aotSocuilal an "xol noiJom 8x£* ^sdt awoxfe aa/so blifJ- 

alnJ ni noliom mli «J3 Y*^' ©oi^e adt 10I fee bbv.' 9B£0 ^aauO. 

ndt Xocfljoo ot enoijom bQlueb i'xuoo ^dt &&sc isidd- al .s6~^o 

•rfj 'ftf i>©Xi'i b&tvr>billi1i ejiiiite o:f fcnjs JbjaoXq ot aitae.ijnsleJb 

*«rr,^ nl .XXlff ar'vt l-easimeli^ Jbn£ «aeXll: srfd- oiorl BtaabaaJQb 

H i-njB -XXld" sdt of vrotoib^tittoo 6'X8W ed-Xv££)ll^£ srfi ae^c 



wag held tliat they could not be received for that puroose 
till the bill h-\d br^en answered. For the reasons stated by 
the suprsme court in that opinion the court below errei in 
thia case in refaaing to rule the defend'^nta to pisad and in 
refusing to strike from the files the a:"" idavits filed by 
defendants. It was therefore held that upon the denial of 
the injunction, the court should not dismiss such a bill 
before any pleading by defendanta, unless it appaared from 
the bill that it could not be so a.-nended as to st^.te a 
case in equity. In this oaoe, leaving out of consideration 
all othex^ allec^ations of the bill upon which the crayer 
for relief is baaedV this bill charged that the County of 
Rock Island v/aa indebted beyond the constitutional limit 
r.nd that the cost of the new jail and other mp.tters intended 
to oe built in connection there i th M/ould be ^o r^reat that, 
even -.vith the avails of the bond issue v.Thich tV.e pecpie had 
voted, still the indebtedness to be oues-ted by isaid vori? 
would be beyond the constitutional authority of t'ao County to 

»■ » ■ "'"' 

create. " These alle .atior^s, if true, r;ould justify the relief. It 
may be they are too general and should set out the amount 
of the County's indebtedness, the assessed value of its tax3,ble 
property, and shoulj show in greater detail that the building 
of the ne;v jail v/culd involve the County in an unconstitutional 
debt; but if it was too general, it could be am-ended, and the 
allegations .vere sufficient in tliat rsapect unless nuestionsd 
by demurrer. It vaa therefore error to dismiss the toill. 
The decree is therefore reversed and the cause is remanded. 

Reversed and remanded. 



saocriirq i^r'i nol iavisosi scf foci biuoc ysrfd- tsiif blsd e|sw 

YO t8;^Grf•B enoe£9T sri;J ao'S .tsiswertfi asecf Jbjsrf XXJtcf srf* IXlit 

Kx ta-rie VToIscf ttuoo Bdi aolntqo JjB.rf* «i tix/oo sms^qua ori* 

ci JbfiJB £ij59lq od- Bitn.pfcns'isJb erid- sli;:i o* srrl^L^ei at eaeos td,t 

Xo' tellJ 8ttvjzbi'^-£. sriJ bsIH sri,-* *fflOnt e^fiiite o;t 2nlsi;lsa 

io X«ixT9JE: 9rf;t ctoqif fzvli blod aiolsisrf*. a£w *I .ejrti:! 

XXlcT js rfotre aeimeil! j-oa bUsoda truoo ©rit «nol*&fu;t"i arid- 

moii i>9Ta3eqcjjB i-i aeslnx; |e*i[JBi>n?;lsi;j ^d -galbBQlq xas ©loletf 

s &&£;i:& of SM b^bassiB oe ecf ;fon bLuoo i^ tBd& lJi,id &di 

aQti£Tsbi.&a.Qo 'io d'ixo sniy^pX ,6ej30 gixit nl ..^Jix/pa nl ess© 

ttevBia srft rfcirfv? nogtf XXid srft lo Baoi*£?9XX«,,.,ji94-*-o-ff«- 

^o xt^^oO 9rfJ t-S£f* i5©3i^i"fo XXXcf jfti»^ ♦oee^stf ei leiXaii ttol 

JimiX XJsrtol;)'u;Ji*snoo arfif inoifecf tjsfcfsi^i.ii e.3w JiitsXal icofl 

JbsJbas*ni BTS^ti^?-. "xsd^o £>njB Xi^t wen ac'd- lo ;^aoo 3ifJ tAdt baz 

^^^^&Bdf JfJSSTcs OS sqT bluQv dt I Qisdi aQi^o&aaQoal.tlit^d acf.o* 

Jt)i3xf eXqosq Bdf rfoiriw ©yesj; £)nocf 8ii:f^59.,aXi5V4 Qdt dil-ti asva 

sHaow. fcXfia ^cf^ b&ts&^.o sd qi eeaxicstcfsiuciX sn;f XXXJe ,Jb©Jov 

o;t Ytni/pO srict lo x^ltodtujs l^aotfutl^adoo erfi" i?noY9<^ sc( LX^fow 

tl .leiXei ©rfJ- y'^-^^Q'^C .-^Xx/ow .suit li ,6;ioi*5-^sIIjB sasn'T .sd-jseip 

*m/Offlje 9xf± j-uQ *jea.i)Xjc;pxl8 Xittje XJBa;snss oot.ex^ x^^ ®o' ^•s'* 

9Xcf,sxJ8* B^fi \o ©wX^v Jb84l«9a$£ Siicf ^eeenfcajfdeixiX b^x^J^^^ ^di lo 

•SttibLlud exit iBd& Llsi&st ts^jssiq ni worio lIuo^^boM ^x&tsqoxq 

iBaoltu&liBao^^av xus nX ^jru/oD s.-fj- svXovisX fcX^ow XX-et ^^"^ ®-^* "^o 

©dif fciUB ,i?9i;nerajB scf tXuoc *Jt ^Xjeieasg oot a^w *i 11 *i;cf {td9b 

Jbenolteajjp essXm/ ifosqeei ^jsrft al iaatQllluQ etew BnoltJS'^eLia 

.XXXtf eri* aaimaUfc of Toiie aiplSTsri;^ bjbvi; JI .jeriumeb xd 

*b%btiQra°ii b1 ©ayj50 Qui ba/i jbssiav©-! siolsisrlcf eX sexoeX siT 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) _ 

SECOND DISTRICT. \ '^^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oifice. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my band and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



.) ')flJ 



'^- .1 



'U ^-^ -^ 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



/ C ^4 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 

Pr6sent--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 

I 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice! 



Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice|„.,. 



CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk, 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 



Z 



1 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

" 2 b 1916 the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



. - -> i T at'L, .-gri i b i esT'I . 8UA: - 






G&n. No. SiilO. 
Geor,_,s J. Eurklieimer, 

Deft, in error. 
vs Error to Peoria, 

C. R. I. & ?. Ry. Co. 

Pltx in error. 
C3-rnss, J. 

George J. Eurkh^iroer, plnintiff oslow (defendant 
in error Ii2re)'.a3, on November 35, ISli, acting aa a ffiotorman 
for the Pooria R^ilv/a^^ Cotr.pany, sni after ten o'clock at 
niglit viLile he was running one cf its cars ever r croasing 
at grade of tlia Chicago, Rook L^land & '^aoifio Railway Company 
defendant below (pi-^-intiff in error '^ei©) an engine or the 
defendant running at a high rate of soesd 4nd in violation 
of a city ordinance, collided ".ith the plaintiff '& c^.r in 
ilicting on :iim serious bodily injury, for r;hich h3 brought 
this action, ^nd after sucosseivs trials had verdict and 
judgr.-:t;nt for 4,S0C0 from \-ir.ioh judgment this -vrit of error 
i3 prosecuted. Tie V3rdi:;t is srr.all co mailer in:;: *-'^- ssricus- 
gieaa of the injury. There was no question that the de- 
fendant was guilty ox negligence iu running it 3 trains in 
violation of the city oriinance vhich limited the i-peed 
to six miles p'^r hour. Th-3 evidence fairly ahowa that it 
^vaa run:~.ing at a much higher rate of speed. It ii not 
clairfied that any error occurred in o.dmittin3 or r-ijecting 
evidanoe, or .^i-vliz^ or refusing instructions exG3:^t in rs- 
fut;in3 to direct a verdict for 'h5 isfeninnt. A reversal 
ie sought hers solely on the ^;rcund that the plaintiff Tiras 
not in the exsroiae of due c^.re for his O'fn safety at and 
Irr.rrediately prior to the tin-e of the injury. It is admitted 
if he was in the exercise of oare he can recover ^.nd 3-iid 
if he was not in the exercise of due care it ni?.ke3 no dif- 



.OXfeQ .oK .naO 

.TOTis ni . d-lsQ 

.oO -yH ,T & .1 . -C 
.101T3 ai 'liL'i 

.1- ,asna£0 

n^maod-om ^ 8£ gni^cs ,XXai <£& ascfcnsvoK no «8^v'(stsiI ^[oi'is ni 

Jj3 ioolc'o ns^ lad-ljr^ ba.s ,Y^5:qfnoO \j£WiijpH -siios*! srl" lo'l 

Sfiieeoio n lavo 8Tii?o ed-i lo ©no gnlnriut G£// sd elxifw ;fTisin 

YfljeqaioO Y^^-^-t'"-? oi.ltos:'^ i, JbnxjlEl ifcoH .og^oirfO ©a* lo ai;>ETg ;^-^ 

srfd- 'to snis^^- -"^-^ (o-xerf lOTia ni 'tliJni.nXcj) woXecf d"n^i-n6leL 

noiit^Ioiv ni bnJfe Jbaeqe lo ©d-£a rigiri £ *£ snlnauT ;tnjBi>ne'i9C- 

ai ISC 6'tliini.BLq sn't rftiw b&btiloo ^Qoasnibto x^to s lo 

i-rfax/oTd sr- xloirfv'i lo'i ^^iJ-ft^-t ^S^i^bod ajjoiiss mi;i no gniJ^-' i "" 

ijni? iottiBV ijjsri eX^iid" svieaeoojjs is;tlG ba.^- ,nQicfox .-^... 

10119 io tlTr exn'J- d-nsfiisi'UJ; ricxn-w moil OOOSif icl i-nornsi;i/(; 

-euoiies =11:^ gniisLie.ioo XI-^.^T.e ai JoiXisv srIT .betuoeeoiq ai 

-3L erfJ- *£r:iJ- aotfBBup on e^w s-xeriT .^iJ^tni 3n;- ;o aes^f 

ni enifiid" ott gnlnnm ai eonssiXgarr lo yjIxu^ sjgw d-njEtmol 

ijsaqs Sfli- tsd-imiX rioiriw sonjBnibio Y*-tt srfd- lo noiJ-£-Xoiv 

ti tBdi gworfe yXtIbj eonstive erfT .axjorf isq seXim xia ot 

;fon ci d-I .i)9oqa lo scf-ri iSiisXrf dajm b *jb 2ni.':aJJ'x aj3v/ 

2nilOtfj;si 10 j;niJ-j-ifrrLr: ni bsaix/ooo ao'iie Ynx: ^fjRricT bemijsXo 

-&T ni tq&ox9 enoid-ouii-eni anisuisi 10 gnivi^ 10 ,8onei-ivs 

X£6asvsi A " .tnnbneJQD edS 10I d-oittev is j-csiii: od" gniax/l 

sjrw l"^icl-nij3lq srfd- rf'^rf* fenx/oi^ ©^^'^ «o 'lisLoc eisri *rrgxfoe ei 

Jbnr" iB Y^s'^ne ot'o aiil lO?- st-po eut lo eoioisxe sn'i- nt d-on 

£)e:fcfimi)jG ex tl .Yix/cni erf;^ lo 8:aid- ©ri^ oc^ troinq Yi®*^i^sm-T!i 

fcire JbnjT 'xsvooaT nj5o ed qtjso lo ©aioiexe Qdi ■ '• - ■-' 3xi IX 



feranoe .vhether the aefende-nt was c^;uilty of negligence or 
not. '.Ve ^.re asi.ed by both parties net to remand the oause. 
The record joea not show the ni-iraber or result of preceding 
trials; but r.c:.)3ll;-:.nt apparently prefers that r;s affirTr. 
the judgnisnt rather than r-iverss and rsm-nd the o?v33 for 
another trial. We have therefore examined the evidoncs 
:vith a viev,' of determining ^vhether the trial court would have 
been justified in directing a verdict for the dsfsddant, 
and, if not, whether ^e rre warranted in reversing the case 
.I'ith a finding of fact that *-hs plaintiff was ruilty of 
contributory nsgligsnce. 

/t The plaintiff had v/orked for the ?.--oria Rail"/ay Cc-n- 
pany as motir^ian for about three v^esks and had no previous 
street :;ar experience. Hi'-: f.'^Jtrv.itloiia Ixom his employer, 
which he understood -..nd cefor?,-. tm time of the accio.int 
Obeyed, were to bring his car to a stop before crossing the 
defendant's road =nd .Tait for his conductor to proceed on 
to the defendant's track ?nd signal hlTr. tcxEaaea cro*s. His 
theory of the case is' that he ^aa intending to afc stop his 
car at the tine in question but that it ras dark and sno'ving 
and he Viras relying on an electric light that the defendant 
maintained over the crossing to £;uid.* him as to th3 place 
to atop; that at the ti~.e the light was not burning and ha, 
raided thereby, drove on to the crossin-r v/ithout knoaing 
where he wae. Tlie evidence is conflicting oij the ques- 
tion -.vhether it was enov^ing, and it 3ho^Ty,' cr tend# to shew 
that there were other x^ans from ^,hich the plaintiff rr.ight 
have known that he v.'aa approaching the track/ ^rom a reading 
of the record we are inclined to the or^inion that ordinary 
prudence -.70uld have guarded the plaintiff zsxass against the 
accident and injury. But it was 3 question for the jury. 



.SBX/jRC Bdi- tnjetnsTc oi ton seitxjeq diod \d ts'I'&ji. alji s?,' .'Jort 

^nlisosiq ^o cMi/esi to Tecfcttua e'rid- yods ^on esoL fcTooei srlT 

frni't'i.B 9'T ti;rf;t eislSTq y-C^-TS'^-P^Q-s tnisXIs'qqjs tvd jeljalit 

•tc"^ SSJ5C eff.+ bct-mei ban eeisveT riJSrft •rsrfi'.eT: fn&ttrgbisl 'siiS 

svsd bIuo¥7 &ruoo' Lsi':& srfJ- isrfJsrfvf giTinimisi-st lo "wsxv := xftiv; 
eeso erf.t ^nieieTsi ai be&tthrr£v ers sr terf^s/lV ,*oif li ,f)nfi 

'■•• "•'E ''^oibS ijWxfj?^- Biio--% ^¥t'^i^^bBliroirhsd-^ftifaU^^ -fV 
BJi/olVstq- W ijfiif l?n?' 'e:i^5«W iberrrft"- tuocfe ""^itjl 'tm?sj^'6toflf"sjE' yrtsq 

.'"'■^tkblo'ojB' ^9c^-^^^ .§mit ■sift &fi)i9d '"'bre^' toahti^bcas^d dotdv 

^ Sff-t s^fcf^eoTC- nio'ied qoiffe V ^&^h&: e-fff "gnlid o:^ aisw «i)©Yacfo 

no bsBOorq o& totoj/fcrroo 8iif"¥b'^ -"^iavr IJitR^jBoi a'tnjsi;ii9ls£» 

~ eirf qoJ^e dt o:^ grrifcrretrtl Sk?^ «rf' tBd-f •frj**BjGO erf-t '^o y'oei;';* 

gnlworrfe bn-c: sftcJb eifsrj-i S-jerft tud aot&asirp iti-frirlt erf* t£ tJBc 

*ns£iT©^8l: scftt tJsif* ^rfgiX oiitoslfe pjb Tio^'rrtYXei aij'T Bd Jtna 

eoBlq e^t oj" bs mid 9t>tu2 ^^ aniesorro srft levo JbsrfijJlxrtjsm 

ten' fcrr^ snirti/jcf j-ori 8i;w trf^fX en';?-' sm'i-a- ^d& ts. tsdi- {qoie oi 

gni«ciT3f t'jodtir vr.lBBcrtc srft o*" no evoii ^xds^l^dt tsLaim 

-teeup ©if* (fo ^rrid-ciX^not) ^ eofletlve sxfT . a£W srf sieriw 

f&rie 0T%i'fr9;J- toTWorie tt bnsf ^gnlwons sbV *1 isrfi'srfT rrolrf- 

trfgiic ?:^iS-fri»XfT 6rfJ rfoXrfe raorr!t IsrrtBSfTf tcerfto srrsw siarfS" ifErlj- 

pnlbjse'r r. mo*i'^ .:ioarf erft snldoBOTq'qfls 6'£W Brf i'jsrlJ rrworrf ev^rf 

Y^Bff'jtJbio *£rf* noinJtro '&-'^* ot JbertlXonl stb sW tioooi Brf^t lo 

t3r'+ J'snti: i8axs« ^ll^nlJBXq erfM5sfcTsjj:3' evj?rf bLuor: Bonebuiq 



and the trial court aou3.cL not 'ir.ve direotsi a verdict 
'Without 7;eigh.ing con;flicting evidence, vrhich he is not 
permitted to do. And while -a-s .ars not B':.tisfied -/ith the 
verdict, and -.v3rs this tac first trial might regard it our 
duty to reverse rind r-inand the case on the ground that in 
our opinion the verdict is against the weight of the evidence 
on the question of the plaintiffs; oare, asttit atill we do 
not regard the cvidsnce so clear and satisfactory on tha t 
point aa to v/arrant U3 in ietermining the itisucs hers by 
reversing the jud^nent -.'-.•ithout remanding the case. Plain- 
tiff 'a duty to step hi;; car ccfore reaching the crcs3ing 
•.vas one that he owed to his employer ana not, ao far as 
this record ehovve, to the .iefendant. F.\ether he vvaa in 
the ercerciae of crdir.ary care in s5SLti:£tH5 guiding himself 
as to the placs to stop and n-.ade a iniitaks that an ordin- 
a-rily oriident sian might r/iake under the circuTistanoes, is not 
free froiT' doubt. There is room for a reasonable difference 
of opinion on that subject. Therefore the judg.T;'3nt is affirmed. 

Aff irrr-ed. 
Kiehaua, ?- J. took no part. 



ton ei sxf rfoiriw .sonsijilva snitoJiI'i-aoo snlxf^lsw tuodttyi 

Q4i dttv b^tlalt^B ton st^s sw ©Ii4w -tnA .oij ocf ,^.i)9d^d■2mTeq 

xuo &i. tts-^ersi iti-Qlm islit teiil siid- ai4* sisw j&mj ,*Oi-oa9V 

ai iadi tofjQi-g srfi-.nQ ©qjjo sn't Jboai^sa Jbrjjs seaev^i o* ifiJ-ijt 

soneiivd s.-f;? iO ^rfgisw .eilJ d-aniJSSJB ei d-oitTsv aril coiaiqo -luo 

oi) s?? XIi*e t±±tmm ,91^0 a'llid-nxjBlq sat lo fioiiasifp 941 no 

Y^ ©is4 39051 bi sff.t snicioji^rf-sj; rri sif.oaettxjBiir od- bf* Jnioq 

-filjsl^ .©sr.Q 94* gaifirifjitiei tvociii'x tn^pr8^"t ®d* sniaiavsa 

gaJtceoao edt snldossi stolod Ijbo 614 cjod"e.oJ x^ub a*%zti 

us 3Ub1 Qe «*pn Mj? x©^oXqms.ex4 gi' isawq .,s4 t.o4rf ^xia^jBT.- 

..,^_i;£>fc!5i.rf s-^^-^-S^-fA^S SKiiftag ni ..sirs ^j^si-ii.i^'^Q .^^s^is-r --:--- ^- ■ - 
-»xUiio isa t^di- p:^£ialsi jb aljfiai ijrxs^qgi-s oi ®QJsXq ©.. --. ^- 

epneislliiJb ©Xcf^ncfSJssT b lol niQo^ §i.8T©4T ..fdirpif ,©oit .Qeix 
.^jsaTi"!^ ai ta8cps^if(; ^dt ^'tolQ^^T .'^iQ/^l^ ,^A^t i^Q^i^tqo lo 



.. .- #,t^uaq Qfl aLy-j .(* 



SA^^'i^W ^ .'. 






■.t-. 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, I 

SECOND DISTRICT. \ ^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do HjEREBY certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oflBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of out' Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



. Lwi : X(, ;• -,1". ' re 



»'^,— J 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COU^RT , 






Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present'-The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justi/ce. 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. 

/ r% '^ h 3 ^ ^' 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Cleirk. - , ,_ yj J. o JTi. c -- ^r' -- 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. / 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

ArH 2 6 1916 ^^^ opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ares 
following-, to-wi t : 



rtla 






ric 



GaQ . No. 8171 

C. V. O'Connor, appellee 

▼B Appeal from Eoone. 

P, R. Zennsdy, appellant. 
Niehaus, J. 

This i3 a suit broxigbt in the circuit court of Boone 
County by the appellee, C. V. O'Connor, a merchant doing 
business in Belvidere, againat the appellant, P. R. Kennedy 
who was th3 owner of a farm naar Bslvidere, to recover com- 
missions for servioes which the appellee claims he rendered 
under an agreement ^vith appellant to procure a purchaser 
for appellant's farm, and for aervioes rendered in connection 
with the sale of the farm to Theodore Sohwebke, the purchaser. 

The declaration contains the common counts, and a special 
covint alleging, that appellant agreed with appellee, to pay 
him a usual and customary commission of two per cent on the 
saloprioe of appellant's farm, for procuring a purchaser for 
the farm and that appellee did procure such purchaser, 
namely Theodore Schwebke, who bought the farm for t33,000. 

It appears from the evidence that the apellant, who 
is now a resident of Lo3 Angeles, California, previously 
resided in Eoone County; he owned the fassas in question, con- 
sisting of about 317 acres, which wae situated in the 
Township of Belvidere; that prior to his removal to California 
he tried to sell this farm; and so in March 1913, offered 
it to Theodore Sohwebke; but Sohwebke said, he was not so 
situated as to be able to buy the farm, at that time. After- 
wards in the month o^" July, of the same year, Sohwebke 
went to the clothing store of the appellee, and inquired 
if he knew where appellant was then living; that he wanted 
to ascertain the price for v/hlch the farm could be purchased. 



XTXS .oPI . nsO 
seXIeqcxs tionnoO'O .V .0 
.snooa soil IfsqrjA sv 

t-*^-- ' ^Yi>6xms2 .H .<! 

.L ,eujsrIeiH 
snoo3 ^0 tox/oo :tl!jOTi;o sc;j ax id-QUOtfS ttuB & si aJtdT 

^iiennsS .fi .<! ,*aBlXsqq« 9rit tenijG^B ,©T9fclvXsS fll aaeciayd 

-sioo 1SV0051 0* ,saai)XvXsa xssii mrtet jb lo lewHo adi e£W odw 

fcsTetnsi 3il BiriaXo ssXXsqqfi acit doldv asolvise io*i anoiealm 

^©Sfixloxyq jb eiuooiq oJ ^flJsXXsqojs dttvi Jaameeisjs £I3 :cstau 

floii-oennoo at betetasi aaoiVTse lol bas ,«:tBl 3'#n«XX9qc£ lol 

.iss^rfciuq 9^1^-^ «a:rfdewrfoS sioJboaxlT o;f micjsl srfi- ^o eXJsa srf* rf*iw 

XBioeqa « fioe ,8Jm;oc noia.floo 9g"1 efilJBirroc floiJ-sx^Xosfc srfT 

YJBq oJ «09XX9qq« ritiw Seaigfi JaaXXsqqa j-^rid^ ^anlssIXx*. itttioo 

stlt no tneo Taq ow* lo noieelffimoo Y^^iitso^auo bar: Lsueu b mid. 

Tol aaaxinoii/q ,5 gnlrrifooiq lo"!: ,flntjel a'*::aXX9qq^ to aolioeX«e 

,TC9aBrfo:u;q doue atK/ootq fcXb eaXXgqqa jfsfJt JbfljR tsrtJft arft 

,000,£Cf To^ fltTB^ sri? ^rfgi/ocf odw »8icfewdo8 eaoXiO^rfT 'iLBtana 

od^: ,jfnjsIXsq .J3 9riJ J«rfJ ©ocaJbXv© 9di mottl ea£9qq4S *I 

^lai-rolvsiq ^BlnroltlsiO ,e©X9§nA soJ lo *n8iXe9:t £ roa aX 

-floc ,aoi*s9yp nt oael edj iermo ©ri ;x*njjo0 9floo3 nX XfaJfaXaea 

■ 3 JBWJXfe e.evt doxrip ,e9i0js VXE iti/odjs lo grrX^eXa 

jBinicTxi.-iJ c; i.^'voasi eXd oi ioXtc tBdi jeabJbivXsa lo qXdenwoT 

6©ib11o ,£X2X dotaM nX oa bac ;tti£l aXdt Xl9e o:^ JbeXi* ©d 

-d ^btne ©idawdoS *x/d jsidewdoB saofcoadT o* &t 

-tsT. . .v'x: /jsdt tf-zijiiiajal odv xJs^d o* 9Xdi5 ad o;f aa bsfsuits. 

©3fdswdo2 ,TB©Y ©«£© 9dJ lo xX^^^ '^o d*nom ad* at ebz^m 

b^rtupat JbcJB ,9©IXeqq« ©dcf lo stoJb ^nXd^oXo ©do o* ;fii9w 

taJojsTf 5d JeiTif jsflXviX n©d3^ esw rf'aelXsqq^ ©T©dw wexial ©d 11 

.tee/JrioTuq sd tXwoo mxsl srit dolriw lol eoXiq ©d* xiXad-isoajB oi^ 



The appellee thereupon volunteered to -.rrite to appellant to 
obtain the desired information, ^>.nd lid so. Rs •..irote, in- 
quiring what waa the lo-.veot orice aji whioh appellant -rould 
sell hla farm; at fchs s^jne time informing; him, that he 
had a purchaser for the farm, but did not diacloae the name 
of the purchaser. 

Appellant ansv7ered appellees letter, aaying that he 
would aell the ±smx farm for y'liO per Tore; ^,nd added a 
postscript -i^hich was to the effect that he would pay app- 
ellee a coir.-nission, in case hs succeeded in -^aking a sale 
of ths fa an to the purchaser in question. After?,urds, Sch- 
webke came to aopellsea store, before he had received appel- 
laBt's onswer to the letter, and inquired ^fnether appellee 
hal h€:ard from appellant concerning the price of the farm; 
and appellee told Schwebke, 'ihat he had not then heard; but 
that aa o^uiok as he had heard, he "jould let Mm know. 
Af terr/ards, Echwebke caiTie in again, and appellee then in- 
formed him that the price of the farm, according to the 
letter he had r ceived from airpsliant, v/ao vl-^O --j^ acre; 
and Schwebke said, tlmt -jvas all he -.^'anted to kno-;?. 

Nothing further was done, Tith reference to the ratter, 
until the T.o-'ith of September follov.-ing, -vhen appellant came 
to Belvidere on a visit, and .vent to see appelles. Appellee 
then informed him, t .at the purchaser he h-^d in view was 
Sohwebke . Thsrsupon appellant psid appellee to:rether \^.'ent to 
see Sohvvebke, at his home; and appellant talked -.'ith Schwebke 
about he sale of the farm to him; nnd the next day, hired 
an automobile, -nd took Soh.vebke out to the place -o look 
it over. Sch-.vebke 'vas .villing to purchase the farm , but 
wanted to turn in on the purchase price, a .'120,000 mortgage 
which he held; n.iid appellant would not accept this mortgage 
as a part of the purchase price, unless Sch-.vebke would agree 



-at ,stoiv' eH .oa fclL JbrtB ^aoi&^^aiolnt bsrlasb 9i\t al^ido 

bLuor: taelL^qqs JrfblJffW t^ soliq ^asYroI arf* a^w t£dxi gniTix/p 

arf *.G.-^ ,fniri gnimio^ni amid- sn^jsa e ':: Jjs jarrBl aid Ilea 

sflisn srfJ seoloaib ioa Lib ;tJLfcftanfil srf* rtoi reesdoruq s bad 

. -raesifoiuq sd* ^o 

gr' ;i88lI©Qqj5 JbsiswacLB j-fljBlIsqqA 

^' ' '«' f>el)l)B l)aB'V®^0-E ^8Q 0^^ --^"^ zxjeSc sri* Has bXx/ow 

"Iqq^ ^jjBq Mxfow sa'^jBdi- ^oslls sdd^ o* sjsw rioJtdw ^qiioeJeoq 

eXjse B 3ccl2li5w nl JbaJbesooixe srf sajso at ^noiaaimoioo ^ sail© 

-rfo3 «afirr£wrr9*^A' .noiiesi/p ni rrsasdoiiiq edi^ Qt m&\ sdJ ^o 

-leqqB i)©vl809T Jbad 9ff srrolsd teiorf^e aesilaqqjs oJ anuso sjfdew 

relXaqqjB rtad^adw bsai^ ■ tXeJi-sI od* o* tawaius e'^oel 

>'««{* 56 aciri'- -ixrtsonoo tccjBlIsqq^ mo:tl biBZi. t&6. 

iis6 '\htBi&'a.hAiiQa. b&A sd jjsdj tersfdawrioS MoJ" ©alloqqjs X)ft6 

.woni mii Ysl ^Mifoi? ©d ,£ixB9d ijsd ©d e^s Tioiirp B£ i"J5dtf- 

-at asrij- sellsqqa trte tfllJBgB at ©m£0 aidswdoS ^aXjiJiwia^lA ^ 

©dif oi gnlbtooojB ,ajacj5^ sd;t 'to ©oitq adt Id ijsmaolt 

.v.:^.-::' o.*^ Jbscffts?; orf 1 1.6 8£W i". 93l[dswdo3 i?rtJ5 

,:i3ttsT ^f.i Oo sonoislstt dJlT,'* ,©nc -adJiul gnldJ-oIl 

dfltsb ^hfirioqqje rtariw ^galnrollolt i9dm9;fqQ8 lo d^nom ©drf Ltiaa 

ssIIaqqA .sollaqojs ssa o;t Jn©r l)n£ ,*ielv jb no sisbivlsa o* ^ 

8BW welv fll i>Bd ©d •taeBdo'ii/q adj- ^arit ,mid £i9aiio!tnl ced* 

ot Jftaw rcad^a^oi' aellaqqjB Jbns ifnjBlxeqqjs noqueisdl .©id9wdo2 

o:Icf9wdo3 d*iw' b9:rflje* ^fnJBlI a: "€ ,©2ld9Wifo3 aae 

taild «^Bi> ^X9n sdt Jbnc ;inld o;f uncjBl ^ aXija sri iuodR 

iooL o' ©o.nX:; 9d:t o+ Jjjo eidawdoS 3foo;f l)aa ,BXidomo;t0B n£ 

tud , siii eakdoiuq ot gnlXXXw bbw a3[d9wrio3 .tsvo tt 

83Bs;tTora 000«0S$ « ^eoliq ©ajadOTx/q ad;t no xii niu^t ot f39*fl«w 

8aa3d"ro."n aidt JqsooB J-on bLuov; innlLsqqz bas {blsd ad doidw 



to give him a discoiint of tl»000. The parties disagreed 
about this matter, and negotiations were ended, and the 
deal declared off, about September 9th. 1913. Appellant and 
Sohwebke do not appear to have had any further negotiations 
until ths final negotiations, about the mi idle of the fol- 
lowing October; and those negotiations resulted in the sale 
of the farm to Sohwebke. 

It is claimed by appellee, that notwithstanding the 
breaking off of the negotiations in September, he kept on 
in his efforts to induce Sohwebke tc purchase the famm; that 
after the first negotiations had been broken off, Sohwebke 
declared, that he v70Uld have nothing fiirther to do with 
appellant, concerning the purchase of the fara, because 
appellant had not treated him properly in the iratterj but 
that a pellee, by repeated efforts, finally induced him, 
to again consider the purchase. 

After the negotiations had been broken off, appellant 
leased the farm to a tenant and rr.^de several improvements 
on the farm. He built new fences, and a barn, on the place, 
at an expense of about ^1500. Appellee olaims, that while 
these im rovements were in progress, he a ain spoke to appel- 
lant, in his store, about the sale of the farm; and again 
broached the subject of its purchase by SchvirebEea. He 
also claiajs that he told appellant, he cou d not see why 
appellant was ignoring him in"the farm deal;" that appellant 
was offering other agents two per cent for selling the farm, 
and none of them were able to £;et a buyer; that he, appellee 
could sell the farm to Sohwebke, if anybody in Boone County 
could; and that appellant answered, by promising appellee 
that if he got Sohwebke to buy the farm, he would give him 
the aame oommission he would pay anybody else; nnd that 
a pellants also stated, he would sell the farm to Sch-,vebkg 



bQ^i-^stb fiai*xj3q eriT ,000,X| lo tauooBth s said svig o* 

Jbff£ JflBlIeqqA .£161 .rI#S latfms^qeS tfifOcfB ^l^o bBXBlObb L^&b 
ecoi^ai^ossxi !C6il*7i/l xoa bsd evisri o* ijseqqjs too ob eidawifoe 

eljsa 8if;f at b^iSjJSBz acoi^^itogen aaorf* fc/tjs ;aedo*oO 3iiiiroI 

.S2icfs?.do3 o* mojB'i Bdi lo 

snj- 50lbfl:i'^arf;tiw^on *JBrf* ,e6ll9qqfi x^ bBetl-sLo ex i"! 

no tqei erf ,a6cfms*qsS ai aaoltBl^os^a sxlS lo llo sniaujaid" 

tBd^ ;aas!t ©rfJ aesrioiujq o^ 9a'tf«iRrdo3 ©ouJbnl o* ei'icoHs Sid al 

aicfewdoS ,11o ns::ioio' nsdd bsd aaoli^ltcgsa turll 3ii;t 18*1j5 

dtlv Qb o* iSifJixfl gfiiif*ofl evjsrf bluon 9d tsdi ,Jbsx8loefc 

aeuBoed ,anc«t add- lo aajBdomq 9di golattsonoo tS-naXXeqqa 

i-i/d 45E*i-jsin ad* fll Y-^^eqotq sold Jba^^sttJf toa bMd i-n£XXaqqJ3 

,aild i)Soiibni \;-l^^-«^^ ,e*aolls Jba#«aqaT ^<i .aeXXaq js tMi 

. asadoijxq adf xaJblaaoo ixI.B3£ ot 

tiiBXXaqqB ,t!to naaToid need i>J3d aaol^^lJogsn ad;^ aed-lA 

atoewavoiqini XjBttevse 9b«ar JbriB (fajsnaJ £ Ov axsl: an* Lse^eX 

«eo£Xq 9df so ,rti«d s bn:. ,seone^ wan iLiud eH »miAl 9di no 

aXld¥ ti?d;f ,aiBi£Xo oaXXsqqA .003X$ *iJod£ lo asflsqxa Ojs is 

-Ifttq* o^ ei'oqe at*>s ad ^aaei^oaq ni siev BiaetaevonzBil aaadd- 

fll«3i? tflB iancjBl 6d:t lo aX^e adJ tuo<ia ,aTco*e aid at ttaaL 

aS .«sSd97srio8 x<^ aajadcxuq ecfl ^c Jos(;di/8 edi fcsdojBoad 

Yd« sea ton t uoo ad ,i'a*XXeqqj3 ijXo* ed *£d;f etci^Xo oaX^ 

i'nBXXaqq* tsdt "(X^afe sarsl sdt^aX mid snlaoflgi eAw tf^aaXXaqqa 

^iiriJil &a? gixiXIaa 7.01 taeo isq ow* a^aegja ladJo gniaallo 8jbw 

aaXXaq^i ,ad *crf* ;taYwd « *©S ot aXd£ aaaw msdJ lo anon ba£ 

XJauo') anocE ai ^ioo'xrte li ^aidawdoS ol' btijsI sdl XXee XjXjjoo 

enllsqoM •galstmotq x^ ,i)aiew8n* JnjBXXaqa« ^Bd4^ fcoe [bluoo 

»td avl^ tluov ad ,«««! adt ifJ^d oi- aaCtfawdoB itos ©d IX rf-sdrf' 

*«dt Jbru? ;e«Xe x^o^^X^* Y-^q tXjJov sd noise Xaraoo amae ad* 



if Schv/ebke v^ould pay for 'he improverrients he had T.ade, in 
addition to the thrice he wanted, p^r acre, which was either 
^140 or ^^150. Appellee Glai!i.a, that hs then took up the matter 
•*7ith Sohwebke, upon the new terms, nnd Schwebke finally a- id, 
he would a-Tain consider the purch&ae oT the farm; and ths-t 
thereupon, appellee iniorrred appellant, that Schwebke v/aa 
ready to buy the farm, if he would see hinij and that a -^pel- 
lant replied, that he could not see hirr that day, but '.vould 
in a day or two; .end af tsr-.vardg, v;ithin a day or tv/o, that 
appellant did see Schwebke, and entered irto the negotiations 
for the sale of the farm to him, which finally resulted tm 
an agreement, and Bale. 

Appellant doss not deny, that he had ths conversation 
referred to, ^-vith appellee, at his store, concs-rninc; -".-he 
terms upon -vvhich he '^vould sell the farm; but denies, that 
he promised to pay appellee a con:raission, at that ti^e. There 
is other evidence in the case, aside from the testimony of 
the parties in interest, so.r.e of -.vhich tends to corroborate 
and some of r.'hich tends to contradict the testimony which 
they £-ave respectively concerning the matters in controversy. 
A ^ury trial resulted in a verdict for appellee; and finding 
the amount due him to be s^-5C6; whereupon appellant m.ade 
a motion for a new trial, ,vhich waa overruled, and a judgment 
entered on the v«=:rdict; from "/hich juclg-'-rient this appeal is 
prosecuted. This is the second appeal in this case; the first 
appeal having rssxilted in reversal, and a remanding of the 
cause for another trial. (O'Connor v Kennedy, 1>36 111. App. 
377). 

It is insisted by appellant, that appellee had no right 
to recover commissions, because thersis evidence to show, 
that the purchaaer was not r':ally procured by appellee; 
that the purchaser had first been spoken to about the matter 



. ; nl 

cag^li^^ Jolb&itaoo of aisnerf- rfoxilw io Sinos biiis 
S^iljnil iiiuvids^ " ':'j;t.-{; A 

l.£9qq£ 
.(TVS 



of the sale, by the aopellsmt hiaaelf before appellee 
had talked v«ith him about the in fitter; and that Ap.pellant 
therefore was really the first one to interest the pxirchaser 
in the pijrchaae of the farm, and therefore that a recovery 
cannot be had, under the allegations of the special count; 
that the first negotiationa which were consequent on the 
proHiiBe of appellant to pay appellee a comniisslon, had been 
entirely broken off and ended; and that the second negoti- 
ations, in October 1913, were an entirely Independent matter, 
in no -.tay connected with the previous negotiations; nnd the 
sale which followed these negotiations, ^as in no way con- 
nected "vith any efforts of appellee; that the evidence 
does not sustain a recovery under the spscial count; snd 
that appellee, therefore, has no right to recover at all. 

We are of opinion, that if, after the first negotiations 
concerning the purchase of this farm by Sohwebke, had been 
declared off, appellant agreed to pay to appellee, a comrois- 
sion as testified to by him; and that upon the basis of 
this later agreement, appellee jTiaie efforts to induce Schwebke 
to purchase the farm, which efforts had theneffect of bringing 
Schwsbke and appellant to an understanding and agreement con- 
cerning the sale, a recovery can be sustained under the 
common counts. (Peter Boxberger v Edward Scott, 38 111. 477.) 
As to whether appellant did agree to pay comaissions to 
appellee, as stated; and -.vhethsr or not appellee did acti:slly 
make the efforts which he testified to; and whether such 
efforts were instrumental in bringing about the purchase 
of the farm by Sch-vebke, were questions of f?ot to be deter- 
mined by the jury. There is sufficient evidence in the 
record to justify a jury in finding for appellee upon these 
questions; and this Court, ia '-herefore not in position to 
say, that the finding was not in accordance with the evidence 



selXsqqja SToTiscr lleasrlrf tasilLaqas ©rft x6 «8lBa bci& lo 
tcjsil&qsj* tBiU bits {Tiett^m' srfcf i'jjotf.G mirf riJiw £e:flja# tjsxl 

^j-xsvooei s tsdt ^lot&iedt fcnc , artel sd* to eep.do'wq adi al 

lictaoo Xisloara cdf Jo enoi^^^alls srf* lebau ,Jbj8ri scf JoncAO 

•rfJ no ?nsup98noo »iaw xfox/lw Bnol^JBld-oaaa iartlt erit l^rfif 

asecf ££r: ^xrofeeirsmoo b selXoqqjB x-'^q o^ i^njBXXeq;'!^ lo e^inoiq 

-l*o^«ii fcnoose sdf isdf Jbrrj* ;l>oibjtt9 £iw llo aeioTcf x-t®^i*J^© 

,T»;?*asr tosfeaet^sfifil ^XeniJrre as 9i65? »SX8X nsdotoO at ,daoii-B 

Qdt bats i^aoti^tf o-^9n awoiveiq sdf rfJiw Jberf-osnuoo T-e-'' o-*^ ni 

-coc Y-B'^ o« -^-i 8J3W ,8JCioi^JBi*03sn saerf* fcawoXXol xfoXriw sXsa 

©onafclvs ©if;? #."!r*t (seXXeqqje ^o aJiol'is ^xus xlJfiv\ i)s#oea 

Jbxie itauoo ££loQqa adf isbasj ^'^^voosi b alsiaue ton asoi) 

. £Xjs is 19V009T o* tcfgit on Bsd ^QtQ^BiQdt «*©XX9qcje ^^rf* 

flaecf Jbsif ^e^fdew/loS Ycf mTsl a Iff* lo 96si0's: . s^inisonoo 

-«i?5?noo £ ,e©XXsqq^ o* TfJsq o* fcosos^ *£iJ9XXeqqfi jIIq teijeXost 

lo eiesd sdt aoqts fjsdt Jbajs imtd ^c oi' i)sili#as* a« aoia. 

9-idsy(doS Boubni oi eifiolls etfim ©aXXaqqa ,*C3iHS9tge aa^aX aixfi 

Sjaisfiiid lo toal^si-'Sfi^t {)i?ri atiolls xloixfw ^mxel Qd^ sssdoruq, ot 

-aoc &ttemBBTQe bns ^ntbixstsi^bau ius o* JosXXsqqjB baa eicfswdoS 

srfT r^tttsj b9at£fsOB ©a abo ^fttevooai j9 ,8Xfia srit gnlniso 

f.VT* .XII 88 ^ti-ooS JbTeiwJbS' v tesi?-feo^T laJs*?) .a;t-m/oc nociJ'Oc 

o* enolaslE'riOC ^jsq ot aa^g." -:'.': zsdtsdv o* sA 

vITfiiitc* fclfc eoXXtqqa ion to terftt ;-.... .^ ,eaXXeqq4B 

>' yja rrec'^^ffw JboR {Ot b^ttti-B&t atf rfoiriw aJiolls Sil* 9^bx 

aej^rfo'iirq arf* Jwode gnXgnltd at l^taeiuiteRt siaw a^xolls 

-i6#s.': hd ot to»l Iro anoi^eaup sisw ^aidswdoS ^tf artel arfo lo 

tdi at son^'bivs tneicilluo ai aaSi'T •X'tu't ©d-* ^cT Jbanim 

easi^ coci; aaIIa<7C£ to" z^nttntJ at 'iiu^ £ ^llJaut o* bioosi 

of cotit^oq at tott aicls-ieif^ ei .Jia/cO aid* Jbrte ;eaoil6ai/p 



especially since two juries founc- for ap::ellee on practically 
the sarr-s 3Vid-:?nce. 

Appellant complains, that ths trial court erred in 
refuainr to permit him to cross GxaFiine appellee aa to the 
detailaof his knovrledge of ths farni in iueaticn; as to 
how rt^any acres there were on one side of the railway; and 
hovv many acres there war© on a certain side of the highway &c. 
Inasmuch as appellee had net testified, that he had any 
special knov/ledge of the farm, or its situation; and inasmuch 
as Schwebke appears to h.-ve teen perfectly familiar with 
the land, it is not apparent .vhy a detailed kno-lsdge cfthe 
land by appellee, was necessary to bring about a sale to 
Sohwebke. ^e are of opinion tiiat the Court did not err in 
refusing to permit any extended cross examination concerning 
these .Tatters which had not bean the subject of an examin- 
ation in chief, and v^hich do not a.ppear to be iraterial, in 
the determination of the important question of the contro- 
veray. 

Appellant also complains of ths refusal of aeveral in- 
structions requested by him. The instructions which vrere 
refused, made it essential for recovery by appellee, that the 
purchaser was originally procured by appellee. In vie-.r of the 
fact, that there is evidence to the effect that after the 
first hegotiations wers declared off, appellant told appellee 
he would pay him commissions, if he .vould bring about the 
purohase of the farm by Sch-vebke, these instructions con- 
tained an element v/hich might h.^ve i^-ioled the iury; ^'r-ey 
might have inefrred that appellee ^as not entitled to recover, 
even though they believed that th • second offer to nay com- 
missions was made, if ths purchaser '.v<=ls one whom appellant 
had originallt talked to, concerning the purchase of ''he land. 



'ii ao sail ': trnjol eeiiUQ ov;;+ scale y-^IjsIooob© 

♦ aoceiiive srcBe' erf* 

ni: Jbga-r? "'iJjC ^di t^di jaalelqraob tnsLIbX^c'. 

Q& Bs ■ oxtjf elrf loellfi^efc 

;-ii..l*^x &*»:' io &*,ii sao ao s-i.-v: oioilf ssros "^asun mod 

.si Ti^ji'.iljx o 9l)ia niJBj^ieo .^ no otcsw saSiIt asaos x^*"^ '^o^ 

, £)8ixJ:*ar-?;t don X)j3xl stflldcjq:^ bjS xfoifmeBrrI 

ilojyxc ■ 3sl)9lwoni Xjcloeqe 

Ot 5- ' SftJtlcE oJ- YT£88S09n BJ5W ^BlSlI^qcaj yd" bfl£l 

rsl ii£ c^or. iiJ;; Jix/oO 9d& j-bjH noiniqo lo eie o?" . 6itf&wrio8 

ta^i^oqal Qdi lo adidBalanadsij arfd 

.Y813V 

-; i I.J-: vs.; : o ist. " la eflJL^Iqsnoo oaljs Jn^IXsqqA 

joxiiiajii 8rfT ,sald yd badesupeti sxtoldoi/ii"e 
Oild iJii^» ,©£.. .:cf ^a^voosr ••.'lenses© tl Btsa ^b^Ba\9T 

:- vd t3ii;ooici ^fXXfinigfTO Sbw :t9Sj3rfoauq 

j*i:J dos'll9 edi ot ©ortsfcivs ai* iSlSifJ- isdt ^tosl 

©sX-s /lo tsi^ioaJb erov aaottet&oseci tBilt 

~'QQJ2. gnliJ iilij :.t ,enoia8xiTL'noo mid ^5q JbXifow ©if 

-iioc snoidoifTtarri s- , .icfewrfoS ^cf ihijbT: srfd lo eajBrfoiuq 

lY'Txft »•''* ■E>»-^- ■• d-^aifli doldW dnsmsXs ns Jb©nXi>d 

«TSvoc -^na Joa «£« ssXXsqqa &£dt b6til9al evj?rf ^riglm 

-inc. ■ bnooea eri* d^rfd JbevslXsd ^srid -rfgjjorf* nave 

T9a."txloTUjq' ©rfd 11 .aljjBrrf bjbw enoiealm 
(Iniaonoo ,od bs^fX^t ixijsnlglio bjsil 



The instructions •.vsre therefore properly refused. 

Appellant ?l19o rcakea objection on account of Vie Tia- 
spelllng of the word "effect" in an instruction the letter 
"a" being substituted fox the letter "e* im the word. le 
are of opinion that the jury could not have been misled by 
this slight error in spelling; and that they undoiabtedly 
gatheted the aifpiificxnce of the point presented in the 
instruction, not-.vith3tanding the error. 

Objection ia also made by aopellant, beoauce several 
inetructiona for appellee, told the ^ury that the a^oellee 
■ie entitled to recover, if he was instru-nental in bringing 
the buyer and seller together"; and iniista, that this 
authorized the jury to fir^d fov appellee, from the 'xere fact 
of a physical bringing together of the parties ^lentioned. 
Thie was not the purpose or iisanlng of the instruction; and 
we have no reaaon to think that ths jury inferred •?. different 
me-aning Troni that usually inferred from the use cf langtiage 
of the V-ind in connection -.flth aiaailar ffiattsrsj namely, 
bringing the parties together, to an londer standing, upon 
a iiatter of purchase and sale; and this ^as the question 
involved in ths case, the only kind of bringing together 
that there was any contest about in the case. Instructions 
containing similar language, in controveraiss of this natxire, 
have been repeatedly sustained by the Courts of "Review in 
this State. (Henry v Ste,vart, S5 111. App. 170; a'firirsd in 
18B 111. 448; Eaffner v Herron, 60 111. ?-pp, 593; affirmed 
in 165 111. 342.) 

Other objections vpere made by appellant, to instructions 
on the ground that facts necessary to a recovery are assumed in 
thea; and that sotjC of them assvune that anpellec is entitled 
to recover a oornaiission; and that some oi their are erroneous 
and arguir-entative because of the repetition of the i^jMBJsttaa 



.bQButer ^ii&t.ioir, ft:cot8is:i\j aie^r enoi^cjuttani &dT 
-sir £■:- la tauooo£ no ttoltoeldo ae^sm o^Ls in^lLeqqk 
itS-idX ^di aoltountBat cue al "i-oslis" bitov: arfcf Jo anillsqe 

l<j hfiiBtm n*2d sv,?a *ofl blsfoo xxtf£ erf:f *i»a'c? flcialqo lo »X8 

v:lJbe*cafoiinu if ».l ' -' - ia.?, ;sxiJtXl8qe ax lotna txlalle airft 

' -* ^.sJflsss-i;. jiiivq Sri:* ^o ooa.roillnsle exft ijaterfd-^g 

sir:: ^ ' ^&ts.lial bc^ {**x^di^:go& iqIIbb baB is^x/cf sd* 

.i>sjsoA^jK9.Ti saitxsq ©if^ to t8cft»:i;0* ^igiii^tcf leoietdfJ -c lo 

l>a^ ioot^oifti&nt srlt ^o ^nlo&act lo aeoo'wq 9cit ^oa s«w aiiiT 

*a©*stlJti> -s J>9m«lfli Y^^^^t ^^-^ ^^£-^? •r-J:--" oi aoe^^i on avjed »w 

sg^usxtai Id 680 ■ ■'■ ; -- ^siTSiXii '^ii^-uaij *jan'^ mp^l gnixiBS* 

^-^Xs-nBH ;s:ic:^-?^ ; 'lai^-xsiile xTJ-Jtw aoitosnrroo at balA ^dS xo 

aocjxr ,8nil)iis*ies«fciw xyx o* .larfi-eso* eaijijsq &di snlgnlicf 

cQii'ssup si!* exw ztdi- Jbae jeXsa -bcjs se.Brfoijuc 1o rtsl^jsm « 

i8ii*3go* ^nlgfiiid lo tati ^Ino Bdi ,9«3o adt at tsvXovnl 

itiioltout^aal .ea^Q ^di at iuods i&^inoz \a£ asm aiQdi t£di 

.aiutfjexr atdi- lo esjta^tsvQaS-aoc ai ^e^JiJjgur.I ixslimjts "^ialBtaoo 

- " "' ■ ■* ■■'-:0 ■ X'^ t)Qat£iaua ^XtsitJBSqsT nsscf «Vi?ri 

r^^^^--r^ ;^- iV'.-t •'ii* »>*! 38 ilfxjB-kT&d-S V xinsH) ,^&^iQ Mtdi 

i^QiBiatJtna iljed r^q* ."^ '^' ,xio^i©H v isnl^pH jSl'i' .1X1 aex 

(.si^s .XII eax at 

/Tl k^mt&BS, 87£ X'>9Voos7 jQ o;f f^EAaasoan itto^sl Ssdi bauor^ odi ao 

b9l.ttt:i5 Bi 9% LL^qqx 'i&dt sx^fea^ aedi lo eiroe i^dt baz imQdi 

&iJO«ao*xia iiJBL x: : " '^ ^'iioa ^axid" Jbnr ;floieaJinaiioo s aavoosi oJ 



expression "instruT.ental in bringing the dsfendant and buyer tc^sther 
in different inBtructions. After a careful consideration of the 
objections rrade, --e are of opinion that there is no reversible 
error in the instructions; r-nd that taken together, atated 
the lav« ith substantial corrsctness; and the ^ury could 
not have been misled by the language used in them, in the v/ay 
indicated by a-ppeliant. 

There being no reversible error in the record, the juigment 
should be affirn.ed. 

Affirmed. 



^ ^ .„ , i. LBtaBmitenl" aoieediaXB 

., , zsttk ,anoiJojJitan2 Jnercs'ililfc at 

-^i £>Qeu t'^^ i^slalrnfissd svBil ton 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. l" ^'^^ I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFPY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thei-eof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oflBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this — 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



...f'/. •-.; 



' Y'l^T.n .'"' 



/ / fJi 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE ■ COURT , 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, thq fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice, 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice. 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. , A ^ 



^' 



E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff, 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

VitiW n the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 

following, to-wit: 






^^£^^-- 7^'' 



I ■ ■ u 



. 30 r f.sv'i 



ao : 
■sSTiJ^i 1,;. bx;.£ c- 




Gen. No. 633S. 

The People of tlis State of lilinoia. 

Defendant in error. 
VB — Error to Co. Ct. MoHenry 

Ed .Taxi L. Her rick. 

Plaintiff in error. 

ro», Edr-ard L. Ksrriok, was, on a trial 
by the court without a jury, found guilty and fined \inder an 
infcraiation filed by the states attorney in the county coujrt 

^,^ ^ ^ €* f ^f ^ - 

of MoKenry County Septemoer 34, 1915. The information as 
charged, that on to-wit: the 24th. day of May 1914, at ano 
within said county, Ed»ard L. Herrick, the pl^LiHi-'.L in -m 
"wilfully, nialioicusly and ^7ithout reasonable cause, lid abp.ndon 
in destitute and necessitous circun^stances" his rife, Teresa 
Herrick, "and did then and there neglect and refuse to iraintain 
and provide for her". This was a penal offense under the %fe 
AbandoniKent act of 1903 - (J. & A, Stats, par. 3431.) The 
legislature b an act aoorpved June 34, 1915 ( laws of 1315, 
page 470 ) passed an act provi:ing "That every parson who ehall 
without any reasonable cause, neglect or refueo to provide for 
the support or maintenance of his 7/ifo, said ^'ife "being in 
destitute or in necessitous cirouIrlst<^nces, " shstll be pxmished, 
etc. omitting the offense of ariandonment theretofore eaisting. 
This act was in force when the present information -^ae filed. 
It exr.res&ly repeal#^ll other acts or parts of acts in oon- 
flict there^^-ith. The stotaa attorney in his brief filed here 
aaya that the offanae was charged and the oasx tried under the 
act of 1315; that the offense under 'hat act consists of ne- 
glecting or refusing, without any reasonable cause, to provide 
for the support cr Ttaintenanoe of the ^Tife in destitute or 
neoissitous circvwcstanoes; that the charge of abandonment in 



.eiynilll jto etn^Q sfld lo sXqoe'7 sdT 




a« %Bhctu bfiafi tac ^cHiiJg ibm/ol ^X'^^Jf;, c ^sjoditv: t-vjoo an-T x^ 



- ^ ^ -;=. ,^ 



fF "1" Ivhlj^q Silt ,:CoiiTC£H .J £»T:j3v,-f)a ,y*ujjoc ii.^a fllrii-lw 



sliF an" TSfcaii sanel^^o X.sa9q b efiv? aiilT ."icrf lol eblxoiq, Jbfljs 
9iT (,X£^o .XOQ .«cfj3t8 .A A .t) - £OeX to *o<s JnsfiixioLnjBtfA 

a± gnieo' ©liw iji^s ,©li?' siri lo son^noi-fli^-p i:o j-roqqjja sdt 

tb^diBlauq, ©cf Xljseie " ,89onx!d-ai!TJjc'stio ei/oitiassoafl ni lo s^fi/tfi^eal) 

.gcid-eiES Bio'jQtztBdi iaaataoL.cmi-Ji ~zo otne'i-o ^iIc^ ■^nimtao .o*s 

.iJsXit 3£V' aoit^ftnoinl tnsee'iq ©ilc: nsxfw soiol nl e^w d-o^ sliJT 

-noo ni e#oi5 lo eJx^c lo e*o^ isdio Xx'^SIXssqoT y-C*38^icx3 *I 

ezsid bsll'i isiad" ni.l ai x-^'io^^js ee*i?*e srIT .rfi-jtwsierf* j'c£X!t 

erf* -i&tcuj tQlTt Xe. , .bfu? bojstrBri'o bjsw sonelt^o erfct t^di^ b^sa 

•ijivoi i Qi ,e«ujJO •Icfi^noe^si vnr; d-uoxliflw ^gxileijls'i :co 3x:l:^osXs 
^0 niif l*&f.L at all?' fi-f.t lo QcxiJBae^flljB.T ao Jioqqwe 9£fj tcol 



the information is surplusage sjnd should be disregarded leaving 
only the offense of neglect or refusal to provide. The oonvio- 
tion oannot be sustained even if t'uat view is correct, t?:? 
issue tried was ««4. raised by . a ploi^ of "ITot giiilty", Vi i U -gnasi' 
a plea of the defendant "That he is not guilty of wilfully, 
maliciously and without reasonable cause abandoning in destitute 
and necessitous oiroumstsjioes Teresa Herrick in manner and fora 
as charged in the said information, as ojnended." The finding 
of the court was that "The said defendant, Edward L. Herrick, 
ie guilty of vvilfully, maliciously and -.vithout reasonable cause 
abandoning in destitute and neceseitoua oircunsstanoes Teresa 
Herrick, in manner and form as charged in 3n.ld inf ormation." •'^~" 
There i^ras no issue ormed and no findirg on the charge of ne- 
glect or refusal to provide fox the support of his wife. 

'^The evidence seerr.^^c show that ths defendant ?/a3 a 
resident of the State of Wisconsin at the tiire the inf orrration 
was filed , and at the time th ^ act of 1915 carae in force. "5^ 
Whstasr under such oircuaiatanoes, a husband failing to support 
his wife living in Illinois is guilty under the present statute 
of committing the offense in the county whers the wife resides 
is a question not much argued. We ars inclined to the opinion 
that he cannot be so held. T7e express no opinion on the facte 
disclosed by the testimony in the rsoord before \is. The judgment 
is reversed and the cause remanded • 

Reversed and remanded. 



artol fenj? zBnn&s at ioii'iaH AesaaT teon-f-Tru-crio BuoilBs&c^a. baa 

ft. 

t^ol^TsH .J brsc^b^ ^taabas^eb btsn sdT" t^t 8jbw ^iwoo edf lo 

9nts£0 «Xcf«noe«si ^ixoritiw jb^js '{l6JL;olpiX.Sfi! ^^Llulllv.' 1o '^d-Xijug aj^ 

^ ^'*^^^^'3|f*4aT 69oasi^Bmorlo Buoiljdei^OGa pas ©^ifrf-Xd-BsJb iii galaoi^nistffi 

-9;rt '^c^^^'iAfi 'TO gaiJbnll orr bns b&ttno' ©waeX pn esw e^teifT 

js 8J3W ii-n^asl©Jb s>d^ t^t voda oT^.:-;?^ soaeblvs sxIT—* 

■^.soiol ill sjTwso SXeX lo *0£ .xfd- Sffi'ld si-fi- *j8 ba& , fcaXil aj$w 
i-Toqrxya oj gaiXlfi^ l>n£cfejjil ^ teeonsi^ieifiVosio dQUB:i9bmi isdistOI; 

^Bbt^i^J-Xr :, -, i'cf ^nl*iflm«oo la 

aolaXqo erf;f o:f Jb9nl4^oni sxs aV •Jbex/s^'S ffoijai i-oxi xxoti'esi/p s eJt 

«#osl srf:f CO noiuiqo oa eesTqx© 3^ *JbXs£f oa stf *oxmJBO aif ^^rf* 

«':o£iaBiaei Bau&o ed& ba£ Lastsvai eX 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. I I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFPY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oflBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



^Ii:,>l 



4'^- 






AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE CQURT , 

•7 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of th'e State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon, JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presidiilg: Justice. 

i 
I 

\ Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice^ 

\ Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justic|. 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk J>0 A ^ T A / ^ A 

I w V/ 'V/ -i- 5 rl. o ~ tJ hj 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. | 



f ■ li 



\ 



\ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

A'lAY 9 1916 the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 

following-, to-wit: 



-?rj j- ; 3I.fl. 



Tii b^ Ix 1 3.': ■■ ■' 



Gen. No. 6383. 

George \7. Clendenln, appellee 

V» Appeal from TThiteside. 

Adams Expresa Company, appellant. 



Per Curiam 




,. ~ ThQ motion to q,ua3li and the proofs -?or and an;ain8t 



aaid motion^^*^ not preserved by a bill of exceptions. The 
record proper ^^ not disclose what particular item of "the 
fee bill ^vaa assailed. The clerk i>*e» copied into the rr-cord 
a stipulation of counsel setting up certain alleged faota. "fhat 
stipulation doss not preserve any thing for oar consideration 
The trial ;5udge i^ entitled to certify to ua vYhat motion hs 
heard and what proofs he h?ard. If this stipulation had been 
embodied in a bill of exceptions signed by the trial judge 
then the questions argued woxilo be presented but -.ve hnve no 
authorized way of kno\ting upon this record ?/hat v.'as presented 
or what proofs he heard. The presumption therefore prevails 
that the court aot-d correctly in refusing to quash the fee 
bill. The judgment is af rimed. 

Af f iraod. 



.&8S3 .oVi .asS 
oeIIsqq£ .nifistnsIO .W sgaosO 



.e^iss;fix£7r rnoil XjssqqA 



sv 







--"^t ff^. .aot.i?iri.. 



F^- irirr-r5Tnsiriri?r-TK?*# 




^enijBS'- -^^-s '3.0 :. ilOw^H ^di ijoe ris.awp o;t noxiom e/rr »^.J.i«aT''.u bAiij' 



silT .enoid^cicoxs lo Xiio' js ^d tsvieastq :^ _ r srs^Uxioiwcm iiixss 

erf* 1o sas&l x.Bluot&tfiQ tf'jsrlw eaoloeit d-on a^^ traqoiq tnoosx 

broker ^dd otal bolqoo «s^^ x'tsIo srfT .iicllsee* 8£W IIlc' ©el 

tsm!" .euO«a bsgsll^ fli£;+isci qu gni^Jd-Be Xsaru/oc lo nol^slxxqifa -b 

9d floxtoJE ^jsrfw 60 o* ^'iiji&o OiJ ijeXj'iiJiis el ssJouJ L^l%i exIT 
rcs^cf fciBff floJ;t.Glxjqi;f8 3ld:f 11 .Jbajesrf srf e^ooiq ^srfw tifus JbiBsrf 
sg^ji/t -t-Eiic!" Qdt \;cf iian^is enoii-qsoxs 'to Ilia s ai b^ibzdaie 
on svorf 3W ;^ucf £)0d-ft6a3iq 3(f bljjQv i)SJj§ajB enoiJesi/p 9£f;t asrid" 
jb£3"fl©esic a.f5'.7 it^xlw fiaoosa siifi* noqxr gniT/onit lo ^fjsw ijssliDd^ufi 
aXisvsiq aio^sisxli floi^fqmuBeiq sxiT .£)iJ3»rl &d alooiq t&dyi io 
©el edt dajsisp oi ^aleal^t at Y-^d-osiToc bstojs ,tii;oo eJt ^jsrfrf' 

•£)srniillfi a J: j-nongLut BdT .1116 

.JbQfflTillA 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, { 

SECOND DISTRICT. ( ^^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFPY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



V 



• I tJ. ■ (iJ tu >'<■■'■}''■ .i'r'\ .ij 



Ml III iri!..-)'*' Kv 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice, 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice. 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. c"^i n O. T i Zf. 4 1 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. / 



\ 



X / 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AUG 1 ' i-- ^^^ opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



. f -.i bn.s fco-' bi.ijf' i}<: 

.9Dj,tanT., ,. aara.Ar' 

. It lie.: 



no ; i L '.v -o j , dOi..s''!-: 
At bslil 0£w i-M.;oO i.iJ lo i. 



'^' Gon. IIo. G177. , ^^ 



K-^ 



Appeal i'ron C;iiToll. 



Porm Hutual lifad^-'iircjioo (■■\\) 

Company, — ) 

VD ) 

3> S« ForlDOS, Aclmini-'tnitor, ) 

of tlie^^tato ox lisnio uliito, ) 

doco f.'od^ Artlmr B, wMto and ) 

Lulu H, V.liGolcr. ) 



IlioIiauD, J, 

/'^ .V.n -io 'niito, docoaGod, iii^e:: lif otlno , '■ -arii.ii-^.jfr , 
0» - t"io ^ ' 1 li k l • cocii^ ICO r Js , took out a life iiicia-ando jolicT 
in tliQ sun of 02,000, in tlie Ponn "lutraal Llfo Incur aiico Co., 
r/liich tr s payclilo to tlio oiiiociitsrs, GdnJ-nin trr, toro or r.csl'rn.G 
of t>io iriDured. On t,:io IGtli d-ny of Goto 'be::', 189/4, tliia -jOlicj; 
T7SS acE5ir;iiod hj Iior to iior ti;70 Ciiildron, Artnur Di T?lilto .:.ncl 
Lulu 11. '.".liito, T7lio r;oro ninors at t'.at tlrjio. Ilie a Dii^vaont 
was properly or-ocutod h^ t lo inrnirod in tlio rojyilr.r v/ay ac 
required "by tlio insiiran o GO:qnn:ir^ and TrltrionDOd lay an a ~?0:it 
of tlio insuraiice conipa-iiy, A duplicate copy of tlio aeGijnuont 
uas fuminliod "by tlio insurance coopajiy and recoiTod by 'l.o 
co;'ipany about l-.ovan'ber let, 1G94, and tIi.o co 'jj-.n^r aceoptod tlio 
acsignrent as a transfer of t^io rif^it to tlio boiiBfito ac>- ruin ; 
uii'ior tiio policy, \7hot3ior the ■..soi^-.-ninGut r/ac oliror attaclioc! to 
the policy, wliicli was retained by the inGurocl , doos not cloarly 
appear, 

Kia inntirod fliod on Dec 01:100:.' ;24tli 101", 'it tie tjiao 
of her death tno inr;Mra:ico policy 1,7.^0 ctill in iior poc crjsi: n. 
Just prior to lier C. o.th tlio inmirod made a ii.i't ttIII in v; 1 cli : 



•Xlort tCBO laotcl IJSoqqA 



W^- 



• liiXoC 



-lloii qMJ ,i!«8I j-secfO^oO lo ^3fi rfdSI odd- jbO .I^c- 

;-■ u^x.^jiaoe ©i£!i) .©mid d^eji^ jjjo «PSOr* t oriw ,; 

- ■ 'Hcf Maaeraflw fi^ia ,-"""■-'■■ -^- •- '■- • 

; ^ J&0Vi«O©l J&rr - 

.ilXCX ild^^S "f.MsmoQCL no UolS 



"boqudatliod the ontiro i^ocoocls pf t;\o policj- to lior dau'^itoj. 
Lulu !■. 7,1100 lor, f rnorly luilu i:. ,liito, 'Zi; -..ill mio aitoi-- 
warclB proljatod, in tlio county ooiiirj ox CaxrolJ. County, ai-d tlio 
dofonclant, J', S, Porl>oD, wo.o appointed administrator of zlie 
estato. ■.■ho adminiEtir.tor clainod tlio proceoda of tiio oolioy 
and tlioreupon tlio Insirranco conpany filod a "bill of int^rplsador 
in the circmit court of Carroll Coimty, in w^iich tliG coripriny sot 
forth tlio fa to relative to tlic is\uing of tlio policy to the 
insured and tho ouhGoriuont cf^si^-mnont tii.;ri;of to Iior cliild on, and 
tho fact tliat the procGOde of lio policy wero al80 claimod by 
the administrator of tCao estato of tiio insured. It also ap- 

peared from tlio Ijill that tlio hot ariioimt duo uador tlio policy 
Kn^3mpaid, pcroEdizBrcH was ($1760. 32; that undor the torrns of tlio 
policy an unpaid prornium no to of ("3G2.48 xiaa to 1)0 --oductorl fron 
the gross aniount duo unclor tiio policy, a^id t' (l,.^^.^,n^^^^^.^..^^M.*..^^ c^ 
prayed to bo allowod to -^s:^ t::o nonoy into ooxirt do tliat tlia 
parties cl-^inin;-: tlio Fjane could intorpload. 

Upon tjio lioarinn: of t-io bilj. of intorploader t'C cotirt 
entered a docroo diroctinG tlio inciiiraiico coD.ix.ny to pay tio 
$1700, [32 to tlio clerk of t>.o court for tho beriofit of t'lo party 
who ini,5lit subr.oguoiitly bo docrood to bo entitled feh.'reto, i. v:. 
diBcharging tho incjuranco coupany from t-ll I'lirtliG* li;:bili!;y in 
connection vrilth tho riattor. 21io canfl^-! vn.c t>. :roupon roforrod 
to a spcia7L master 3.n chancery to infiulro into and report '7r:ich 
of tho dofoiKlonts interpleadin:]^ v;::.f.; entitled to th fund in con- 
troversy, ffiiG master, under tlio roforeiieG, hoard .11 ori once 
offered by tho r .spectivo ixirties to the tpiit* 



orrtsO 






.£i 



US 

locr 



:-.i.^V-~i'.;3 3l-5 
"- c 



Eridenco wan offorocl bofoi-o tno :xistcr not; only cone jriiing^ 
tho mat ero portaliiinc; to tlio assicnrieiiL, , [-.Iig validity of 
wliicli v-.;.i"! In controversy, "bu t tlicre V7- 2 also ccnsidGrablo e i- 
•lonco orfored concornin,^ tlie supporjod disposition of coino of '-.lic 
as' ots of tlie insiirod iDy lier urotrior, Pranlr 3, Adaiic, i^id ooncorn- 
in g a supposed contract onterod into loj Adans v/itla Lulu 11. .Iiito, 
on the Btrengtli of T/Iiicli it rras claimed ty Adarnc slio requested lain, 
as executor, nanod in the ttIII of the insured, to pcy r:or lirot or 
('1,000, and to roiEiburse hiini^elf from tho i5rocoGcG of tho policy, 
when ho should collect tlio t-ame; alr>o evidence teiidin;2> '^ prove 
that Lulu n, wTiito afterTrards, at tho iiu-tance of her ImslDand, 
repudiated fc-.is allowed a^'roenent and t'lat aftermirds Adac^ v;as 
arrested in Clinton, lo-.ra, upon a ehar{je of eoneoalinf: the v;ill 
of the incn'ired, and f-iat certain parties, including Lulu I!, 
Tlic y ■\± B.hlilte, Ijy ncans of tMs ar est, and thre^^tcn- 

ed prosecution, procured from Adans tlio pf\',Tno .t of ^1,000 to Arthur 
B, TThite, anc" also other onoy, Ada b testified that hofo e hi& 

arrest ho I^ad voluntarily paid to "ulu !!, VtTloolor, by th.o directions 
ho had received fron his cictor, tluo deceased infr:rod, hofore her 
death, tho sun of >-'00, and also O^OO to Artlmr h/.Thitc, . y(^ 



After ?ioarint_- the evidenc; o th^e n-pccial riaster riacy a report, 
■but exceptions nore filed to tiiiss roi/ort 21:1". thero e:/ccptions 
"V/oro £5ustainocl by the <;ourt in its decroo* 2ho dec .00 finds that 
the equities in the case are \7ith ".'CPorbeo, .fiici iniytrator, r.h6 
is appellee herein; that Lis sic liito, on vlij? 7th day of ilovonbo:-, 

1912, raa-'o her rill and by -^ it ::ave \ivCL\x/' , ..heeler the not -u-o- 

/ 
coeds of the policy in rv.ostion, ':x\^'. tiifat r, o died at Clinton oi... 

tl'io 25th day of Lovenbor , 191:2, ani?//t'iat 'icr rill ra-: adnitood to 



Li^fe^vv/^-^' 'lC^xmJ^ ^" ^ ^^ - 



to -55* IBiXsT OiH t V ti£«!i«pf -^ He 



.' 000,. c»^ iSft- 



■cf .foJ: 






:; O'j.Ji 






probate and nas in full forco and ofr'oct; at tho time of \qv doatli; 

tliat at tlio tiino of -i or d oath, Frcnir JJ.AdarniJ t;ac in yosseL'r'iou 
of r^onoy and assets of lior ostr.to .?j onntins to iirnvards of v2,000; 
that he T7':'.g najied as o;-ccutor in olio v:ill nontioncd, 'but "^locc-aco 
ho was a non-roident coizld i^iot act as sxich; that shortly after tho 
death of Lis'io vniito, Liiln '.I.'.hoolor roq^ estod Ad.a. id to pay Art' •ar 
B. 'Thito .-)l»000 out of tlie estate of Lin.'Jio -aiitc then in ■■as hauls , 
vrith the muT erstaixding that the a ount due on the 3>alic7 should 
ho collected oy Adams and the Ol,000 to oo paid Arthur B.Tliito 
Bhoikld ho coductod fron t"ie amount duo on tho policy v;hon collected 

"by Adams; and tho docroo further finds that Ada: iS agreed in v,-rl"iin,r: 
to pay "hite said O2.»000 '-^'^^ t'Jiat thoroaftcr Lulu i:. r.hoolcr at- 
tempted to repudiate her af;roo::iont m th Aoxnas tlmt the v;l»000 should 
"be ooducted from tho amount of t/io policy T/hon colloctod hy -dans; 
and furtjier finds, that thereafter , hy eoHucion between Lulu ::, 
V.'hoelor and hor hushand, and Arthur ■".".hibe, and one '7illi'.-i "Jr o\rn, 
Adans ^7as arrested upon a clmrr^o of suppro' sin"- t^io r.ill and in- 
carcerated in the jail at Clinton, lo -a,; that tho arrost of 
Adams was rna'^o for the- puji'pone of compollin:; hin to pay naid -.'iiito, 
and Lulu IT, TJlioeler, monoy 'belor^ng to the estate of the insured, 
Tfhich Adans then had, end t'lat viiiilo Adams v/ao so nndor arrest 
ho -."as compelled, hy duress and tlireats of inprisonient, to pay 
said '.hite said )l,000, wiiich caid Lulu .:, '..heeler load requested 
Adams to pay to Arthur J3,.'hito, and tliat ho ~n,B conpelled "by thooe 
means to pay to naid Lulu !■;, .Iioelor -^264, arul that all tho; o 
stuns wero paid by r:s,id Adams out of the as. ots of aid estate . 






|l£d£Ol; 






Ilhe docrea fiirtlior fiiifs that Lizlii ::,:,lieelGr aiid .dG.v:.s 
aiid irtlmr 3, ITlilto all iinclGrstood at tlie ti:.>o Lulu ",',.lieolor 
Toq. osted AdaraG to iXiy saici -.l.OOO to said Arthur ':•, liito that 
the a-'iomit of said jTolicy sriOHlS oe collocted bj tho legal ::o- 
;prGr:ontativeG of said estate viiO th t said Ol»000 ishoiilcl he ci.s- 
ductod from the anotmt duo on said ooliej''. 

[The decreo also findc th t Lulu •!, .hoolor and ..rthur D. .hito 
are estopi'Od "hj their co duct, a€ .\'Jroresaicl , frori disputiii-]: tJie 
right of t2ie legal reprenentatiTres of ss^ estate to colloet the 
anrount :uo on tho policy in queDtion, and t'l: t in equity and good 
conscience the t^.ioiint (\io onthe polic;/ Gliould he co .lee tod by 
the adriinistrator of the estates; and the decree finds t/at :'. 8« 
]?orbes, adninistrator of the estate, should in equity and good 
conscience bo allor/od to collect the anount diie on tlio policjr 
and choixlc'. have t-ie ri.ght to an equitable lien on :fe3TvC2S±is3K said 
aanount so col"'oeted for tho ourpor-e of reinbuxsing the ontato for 
said rran of .1,000 paid by Adams to Aiiite under dur0v3G,an(f for tho 
d?urtrer sura of ,,264, paid by '.dams out of the as^~ets of t e said 
esLa G tjirou/ich the o::tercice o:! duress OjiO. tiireats, and t:'- t the 
balance of the fund chould he distributed by tjio drainistrotor 
under tho torr^ of the v;ill; and it T7::.g ord.ered in t^.o decree that 
tho ad'Ainistrator be pdven a lien upon the amoujit in the hands of 
the clorlr for tho purpose of reinbursinr' tho estate for aid il.OOO 
paid to Arthur -3. '.hite by \dans aaid for the ;;.264. paid to Lulii 
M, i.heolor by Adaias, 

It is appa3;jB:fTfc that tito decree atte-ipe to adjudicate upon 
laat ers v/liich \7ere not in isyuo.and in no T^ay coimected "-ith the 
qiiostion arising XLid.or t'lc interpleader, and ad.judicalea 



-5- 



;Ieorf.\. ■ stlssc: 1 ceiocb erl 






rights a.ncl litibilitlos resiiltin^ from a contract' all o|?gc1 to 
hBve boon ontored into by ono of tho oartios to the litigation 
vrith Prank E« Adams, t:1io \7as not a party to tMo ;.' it; al80 ad.- 
jndicatoD mattoro concerninjj monoyrj paid xuiuor an allorpd duroos, 
and as tho ros^lt of a conspiracy allO;-:e^ to Imvo booTi entered 
into by somo of tho parties '.;o tho fJtiit wifli other yartieo not 
coni:iectod TJith tho siiit, to lirin^; about the orociiixs lo; .t of }.iociiy 
from Pranlr '.i, AdajiE. 

Franlr :j« Adams, who vrcs m^ od as exocutor of tho Iv^st ^7ill 
of tho inmirod, Lisr;ie Hhito, novor hocario tho logal roprecienta- 
tiVG of tho estate, rmd noror had qualified, or atlenpted to 
qnalify, as O'ociitor, Tho trr^icactions hotTroon him and .^^thnr 
B, "/hito sad JjiiIu :„. V.hoolor eoncorniniT tho as^iotc of tho estate 
and the ■payment to Arthur "3. T.liitG and Lulu M T/hoolor of r.llosod 
a sets of thG estate aiJ;;jar to bo "wholly f.oT^Qlcm to tlio issues 
ini'-olred, Frank 7., Adann; "/ s a vri-feieos in tlio caso, and toctifiod 
t/iat ther:^ never vroro cxiig- assets of tho estate of Lisr.ie IHiite in 
his liands fron TJ-;:dLch 0J3y loasrmont could be na e; tha : she had .^ 

donated to him all the asrets of lier estate before her„ death, and 
that she loft none except the in:ur£mce policy ♦T Inasmuch as ho 
was not tho lorjo.l roprecentative of tlio estate, and cid not at any 
time iLandle any of the ascets of tho estate, "iTliatevor ar.-anrjenont 
ho nay have -^ade rrlth eit.'?iOr of the paarfcies nar.ied eonooriiins the 
payment of Monoy to then, or oithr of thesn, v.'as purely a jporsonal 
matter in v;iiich t];.o estate v/as not legally conconiod, and if cor- 
ta-in parties T7ronr:;fully caused lilm to f;1vq up money hie rcriody 
was a personal one, and not ono tiiat \70^.ild pass to tho ad.dniE'tra- 
tor of o,n estate. In crr;^ rlox: of the case the controTarsioG that 
are allecod o have arisen anonr; th.o parties at Clir.ton, ;oT:a, 



V7oro p TSoiial In tlioir natlirG v/ii;li wioicli tiio 10£>il i- opresfaifcutivo 
of tiiQ eDfctvto, TTlio TTaB a.-rtorr/arclB appoint £5c?. in Cari-'oll Oouutj, 
had no oonceim iTliatovor, 

If Fra-ni: E, Adaias, as a iiK?.tber of fact, Iw.d. vnj ascets 
of tho estate of the docoo.soO. in hie possocBion, 'Bio lavf points 
a "raay for tho ad Inistirator to procood in order to olitain tliorn. 
If tho' ad-.lnintrator Ivha a le^^al claim ixpon t'iio T)rocoG{?.o of tlio 
ijistiranco policy or any lion t}i.:rGon it ic not becaiice of arqj- 
actc or contract ru'^o "b'j Franl: .:, Adano v.ltli Artlmr "j.V.liito; 
02' becaTTSO of -; onoy pcdd lorj ideiis to '■Tain r., 'lie el or or Art ur 
B. T.Tiite. And if J;'-ranJr 7., Adaras acquired an^r ri^^itrj concaraing 

the proceeds of tliis policy it ic; clear r-liat Bv^h ri'jIitSi sliotild 
n ot bo afljudicatod in ■, r.iiit in -.f -.icli lio Tiar. not a party; nor 
could Bxidh rights bo trancferrod for adj indication to tho o-Aiiiini;;'- 
trator of tho es^tato of t;ie daceasod in;,TiArod. 

Ihc only roal matt or inleliuo under tho roforenco xvan 
whether tho ehild.en of LisL-ie whito r/ore ontitlod L-o tho pro- 
ceeds of the p61icy imror the anni^^nnpnt. If tho acsi{5anent 

as valid and boca-o ler^^lly of -octiT'o, than tho proceeds of iho 
policy rlr;htfii3.1y belong to t'lon; if the arjsl<;;nroont rnis not 
valid, tlion tlio od :inintrs.tor Troiild bo entitlod to ;nich orocaeds. 
In flic state of tiie case tho partlon, and tho ploadin^r';!:!, no 
other criiest'on could properly bo liti;^a-(wd. ( Pjyors v fiannom,!'. 
C Co. Ill 111. \pp. 575; 7.yas r :oy::,K, 231 111. SG7) 

TiiG v5iolo controTory, th.erefo o, taimo upon tlio validlt." 
of tho aGSigmiont rnxOo by t'lo incn-. ed. It is eontoa^'od by iho 
appellee, Porbon, that lilio ar'Si,^tent ri .o not a ralid .■if '■i iclnA 

-7- 



OHO, inasmticli o^ tiioro ttcc no AolxTery of tlxo policv- blic j^ollc^" 
after the asnign-ont -oo tlic ;liisiirod*s oliilcL.on, liaTiiv; roniilnod 
In t'lo poGSont3ion 03? the iiifiir ed; and Docaaso it is cJ-ai: (5d thiit 
tlio ansisn'.^.ent myj not attacliod to the polic;,*-, 

TliG r o mil r omen t -blitit an sssignnent sJiould "oe attyxjiied 
to tlio policy T7aE one raare "by tlio insurance conpoaiy, and 'U^iit 
fom tliG basis of zm o"bjGction by' fiie inssirtmcG corapciiij; but 
inasrrniclx as no objection wa raisod to tlio assiGnnont by tuo in- 
Gurance oonoaiiy, tiio legal ropresontatiro of tlis docoasod is not 
in position to offectivoly qiioation tli ■ validity of tlio assignment 
on tliat aceoimt, ( C?:'0£?s v iriitiial; Life Inc. Co., 92 111. .V_p.207; 
Johnson, et ol, y Yan Epp~J , 110 in. 551; I'artin t Stuubings, 
1E6 111. 387; Aid Society Y L T/is, ,9 I'o, .App. 412; 3\7ift r 
R,C, d S'.C. Bon^ADOO. 96 111. 309) 

Yiewing- the aaCi;-;iMont- of tlio policy in t.io H^it of a 
voliintaiy aettlenait of the- proeeods by bJie inLnorod upon hex- 
minor children, a I'Viinu":-! doliToi7/ of tlio policy \7as not nocos- 
sary. And in casos of thic l;:i2ad tlio raatto::' of d.oT'Yox'^ ic lar^jo- 
ly a nuoDtion of tho intention of the grantor or do:aor. ITo 
particular for]]i or corenony is nscorjsjiry to constituto a dolirory. 
It may bo by acts iTithont wordc, 0:* by 170 rds udthoii t acts; 027 
by both. .Anything that elnarly mj?-nifoBts .-in iiitontion to '■dliTa" 
and port \7ith tho x^roperty involved conoti Lutes ■:: Fruf'.icient do- 
livoiy. Henco tl-io very- oscenco of delivery is fo.o intention of 
tho party, f 3ry\-.n ot al v ra;h, 2 C-iliiian 557) 

( So in Zin!^r"ijury T liu^nc-ide, 18 111, 310 ".Tho o t:io 



quostion aroso upon tlio rclidity of a dood upon f.ic matter of. tUc 
dolivory, and xtIiqtq tho grantor liad sent tlio deed to tlie rooordo:.- 
emd liad it recorded, but without tho 3nio\rrledrj;o ojT tho ^i-antoo, cnl 
who 'o tho grcintoo did not obtain posnsssion of the dood ujit.i.l 
after the grantor's deatli; it r;as hold thj^t if tho grantor, Trith 
or without anj/- provioiis ar:;'an^ontot -^^j-ith \)hxi grantoo, lic-d Di^nod, 
sealed and aclmowled^'od a deed, placod it in tlio ?!iandD of tho 
registrar to he recordod, notified the grantee of t-.io act and 
iioo. CGontod to roceivo it, "by r/ords onl;/, this vro Id ho a ;<::ocd 
delivery, though tho grantee i'iod oeforo fciking it into hio 
actual poncesRion ■bocaiise tho a-' ont ia the principal eloacnt , 
and talcing the dood into f'o gr^i-m toe's xx)Ssession is not in- 
dispensahle, "but onljr evi''cnco of assent and acceptance* 

In tho eaae of minors or infants rih •;e a voltuitfirv 
sottlenBnt irj laado for t::oir benefit, an acceptance is presuiiod, 
!I!jie court najs in r;ntoroon vs Choolr, 23 111* 7£ in rofcrcnco 
to the raattor of ddliTorj?" in the ■ a^^e of infante;: " All tho 
cases cited on both nidos arc reconcilable on \:?.i3 onsidcration— 
that the intention is, and riunt bo, tho controlling elonent. In 
a caoe lihe this, v/h-^re tho con"e3'-anco v;.:.3 voluntCi^T", C'^-^^ to an 
infant who died before he ro ched tin age to C:.ccept or reject the 
conveyaiice, a dolivory end ac eptance "ill bo ^loro readily pre- 
siriod then in tlie cases to -./Mch roforenco ia r:aQ "o-j appollcat*s 
counDol. nic principle b(n.ng adj^ittod that an Infant of tondor 
years can tcJso "by deed, not having at the ra o tiao diecretion 
to a,ccept or refuco, ;.'n.d dying before tiiat ;biriod arrives, c.-<X}. the 
grantor hr,.ving p or formed every act ho coitI-J -)orform to pass tho 
title tho infant, axid it beii;g for hio benefit, it io fair to 
nroDume ho has asnonted to it," 



.ooOv:: o: 



!inio principlo astabliBliod in tlie casQS roforrocl to conco-ii- 
InS do livery and. tliG i-JreSTinptions s,Tisiii(^ in refererxe tuiareto 
in casof' of infancy, hLWo bGon roitGratorl "by oiir 011x2? o.e court 
in B naiabcs of cases, ( Tvir^ird r w^ali:or, 59 m, 41;;; Rood v 
Douthit, 62 111. 5^8; Union lutuol Ina, Co. v Ccapboll, Or- 111. 
267; :'ebar r Clirioton, 121 111. 91; :.alli-i^ r :7illir-?j, 
148 111. 426; Itiller r IleorB, li35 111. 284; XVooU y Aobott, 
189 111. 4.8; Balier T Hall, 214 111. 364.) 

[Uho proof GliocTS tjmt/tiie timo of the assi^iinont in 
qiiGstion tlio tv70 children of Lisale Vaiite woro li-vin.-: c.z liAmo 
vrlth. thedr i-c tlior, cmd tliat thoy xjqtq inf^mts of tlie a^^.T of 11 
and 13 ,/oars rospoetivGly. Am!). t;lia intention of tho insarod 
to transfer tlio procoofis of tjio policy to tl-io uiaiiaion is cloar- 
ly nanifeotod by tlie fc.ct tlia' she aace tho assicnr-iaio in duo and 
piropor form and oxocutod it in duplleato, and cent to tijjti comvTiny 
ono of tlio duplicatos to natisfy tlio require entEi ErJo 'by tlio 
company in tliat rof^ard to procure tliair -.-.ssent to tlie ac: ijp3i.mont 
and to make £3uro tnat tJie proceeds of fiio policy -.rovCld be pMjd 
to tlio chilcijen instead of to "ler eetate, Shore was r.othin;-T 
further that she could liavo done to noro effectively imlicato 
that "bj the asDignnGnt slie intended to naico tiia child;, on tlie , V 

■benoficiaries of the proooedn of the polic^r. A Lr.iiu.-'J. 'ifaLiTory ■ 

,1 

of tho policy tras not Trinomr .practicable, nor V7xs it noces;ary 
undor tjjie authoritloo cited; ^1 acceotanco by he child.- en 
nniDt be loyally pr ^suraod it bcin-: an asaigiiLient for -ii.eir bonGfit, 
As a voluntary settleinent upon tlie rainor children, there ttt.q a 
sufficient losal delivery to ^ivo the assignne&it binain-; ef.lb ct. 



-10- 



"T !?«E)g^t 



tin ^m , 









, '-if;ti»r)Cr 

• "da 



:-i.1.UxOX^2iX9_ 



1 v.uoiDiiixra 



But tlio assiganent in question 7;as in logal efloct 
and as a matter of fact simply a cliango of ■baaoficiary, S'lis 
policy, T^aich vras taken out "by the insured, and made payable to 
lier executors, adninistntors and assigns, is in tlio saTio legal 
category as if it liad iDcen na.de payEible to lieraolf , and s"io iiad 
the sar^e power ovor it ac? if it liad "been originally payable to 
herself. ( Johnson v Yan E ops , 110 111. ■'ol) In the Tsaso 

just cited the court says; " !Bho contract boin;:; betT/een tho in- 
surer and the party tviioso life iB insurod, so long as tho latter 
retains possession of the policy he '.as the right, v;ith tho con- 
sent of the insurer, to c]iange tho contract of ineuraiico so re to 
giye the proceeds of t;.ie policy, upon his death, to a dif; eroit 
beneficiary, or to chaiij^^ it in viij other nrnner tiio contrncting 
parties r/ay agree upon not contrary to lar/ or good iiorals. ffliat 
tills position is supported by monj analogies of t 13 law ac v;ell 
as by express adjudications murt be concoded. f Cli'.rko v Purand, 
IE Wis. 248; German v Hov/ard, 25 id. 108; Poster v Gilo, 00 id, 
603, and Gar^bs y "itiial Life Ins. Co. 50 lie, 44.)" 

Wo are of the opinion, therefore, tliat tlie real effect 
of this assigniient of tho policy, T7hlch iras accepted ond ac- 
quiesced in by the insurance corapany, was a chcnge of tho bone- 
ficia-ry,and a doliTcr;/ of the policy, fo:." this purpose, iB not 
necessary. It is not nocescary in ordr efioctivoly to ma^B a 
person a, beneficiary in an insurance policy that tho policy fr'iouia 
be dolivcrod to such person; nor is a dolic ory of tiie policy 
necessary to tho beneficiary who is SEcbmit-tcfc-tirH substituted in 
the place of the original benoficiary. 

We conclii e, therefore, th.;t at the time of t;io doath 
of the insured, Lisi^io '.liito, her tv;o child on v;o: the roal 

-11- 



rox^asisp n: 



;i.o-Qei&o 



antatei 



Tbonofi claries of tlw policy in qiionuion ojid le^^ll^r entitloCl c-o tlio 
proceocl!:^ ohoreof in the litmds of the circuit clo lc« 

Fox t?-G roasonr. stated it a'lould liayo l)Gon clocroed tii. t 
tlie procoQds of fao policy in t■■^o liando of tjie elork of tlij circil t 
cotirt iDo paid to Artiim* !'. '.liito and LtlLii I:, iTlioelor, oacli taMng 
one half; and that the adminintrator of tlio GStato of Lisi^ie V.liito, 
docjoasod, had no intorost in or elcin upon tho fraid in q.iiGStion, 
TliQ decroo is t'loroforo rcvorEed end tilie csiiso roraandod v:ith 
diroetions to onter n docroo in ;.rcco2'danco rrlth t e vioirn ho vain 
esrpro BRcd. 

Eevorsod and roniandod vilth diroctionrj. 



-1::- 



,?r*irf« 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. i ^'^^ I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my ofBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my band and aflBx the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



/yyiho 7I1I ill 



M^ ,^ 



■-, ! 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, J 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice. | 

I 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. / 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. ^ J, 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. I 



\ 

\ / 

\ / 

\ / 

\ / 



\ 






\ 



\ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AUG 1'^ '^'*' the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



/; 






..:.--,- .- bsTbnx;. ^.... : .. ■■.t-t:, ^: 

. 30 i i' 301. , S3);;ia;A0 ' . L ^rxjAUg . rioH" 
,soi;t3XfL -JJ.IJXa ^^O'^AHSOa .fioH 






'■ < 



i3ijj-o, -^A hc\B abiow e-rfi- ni , ■? . ••'"^'' "• :-. ■■■'.■^'' 



Gen. No. 319 5. 

Puytcn J. Tuohy, apr'ella,i!t . 

vi A.ipeal from "^ill. 

ChicjL^S" -^ Jol3.et Eioclrio 
R:i.il-,ra-y Co. c-ppellee. 

Ni-=5h^uo, J. 

Thij is a ffiiit brouc'"!t by P-:.yton J. '^'uoliV; en r-ttcrnsy 
e.t l-inT, by petit ioTJ, to sot.r.nilDh ".n atto^'ney' >-. lien un ier 
See ti Oil 1 01 -^hg act of V-^.'i Gsnerul At-'hSEbly, pt^saed in 1909 
c .c-ti-ip; an iittorn^y'a lien; .~r; 5 -^o enij'cro*; t'.i?^ sams, a^ainat 
the -v^pellee, Chiiaso ». Jcli'jt ricct-ic r-„ilvvay COy^Tas 
petltiori o vertfvt'n.it lairec r. i^irer, of t^.iS oity of Jolist 
and. C&vr.ty of 77111, r^taired f^.2 petitionsr to -eprstent him, 
as psrsonul I'sprc^entative cf "I;;rcli Vinar, jecsatsaji, ir .ro- 
tating tie 33tate of t-vs ieoeased; yr.i also in ao aotion :or 
peraonai injuries rsaulting in th? death of Sc^id Hwroid i'insr 
such aoticn tc be bro\;[;ht a^^aiviist the Cliica^o & Jolj.et 
risctric Pi-il-vay Cc . ; thi.t the petiticnsr on or abou'G ttie 
3Sth. -lay cf October 1913, entsrod into a oontraot ■.vitii said 
Min^r, •/.'bereby he --v-.s to r^oei'/^ for bio scrvi-oeB reniercd 
in t;.;:it behalf, a fog :■** one tbird cf tbs amoart reoovivi-ed 
a.j^aindt the ChioaTO ■'■ Jolict E:»ctrio Rcil-Auy Co,; '-nat in 
compllancn .ith +'e t'^rmn cf the af ore-said a.3reewent, hs 
attended tbs inquoct ov:;r *be body of -fa aforofjaid Harold 
'xinsr, ieccasad, an i examined all the '.TitnenseG befor- the 
coroner; that on or :,bout thy 31st. day of October 1912, 
he Qr?rVGd upon the Chioag;© S- Joliet Eleotric Railway Co. a 
nobioe of attorney's lien; that tbsrsafter Janeo ■''. Minsr 
and the Chicago S-. Jcllet Rail, my Co. ?offlpronised the said 
olaiiT:, ■Ith Jases W. Miner as -dminiatrator of the satate of 
Harold Hincr, deceased, and that the dueb of vSCO v.'as ::-id 



.eellQqrji. .oO \m.'Li.^:?i 

SQSl nt c«B8^q ,X-tcfcraaaA larr&nsD srfj- ^o to* ©rff Jx> I aoiizsiB 

S-rfrVfCO v«^*Xlu=-^ oxii'&sl^ *ei:Iol- * 03£cirfO .asllso'r 

,miif Jn&sfTcqt^ oJ ierTo2;t £:fsq on'd- .fca.Tijej-si »IXi^ lo )c*rri/oO tnjs 

TO": noi&os o^ iii oelii tn£ jJbsejiecsI srli 'to 9t^«se odi- ^niiti-a 

TtsrrxM i?ioTi.g»H f-jiiie io Ai£Bt '^■{■i: at gaic^Lussi a8ii*j{;xxi ijsno6i:3H 

JsiXoI, & o^-^QiciO Qdi tani£3.e tdi^uoic sd o;? nol&os dovQ 

add- 3-iJOo^^ -xo no isnoltitsq Sffi" :fi.i* ; .oO y-3'*'"*^*-^ olai-oeXl 

Jbixse rf^ivf JO£1c^rtoo £ o-ni Jbsijstns ^SISX t^rfot' . . :: 

i}9t9i;n3i: eaodtviae oirf ic^ eviece? o:f s.?w srf vCniQiin ^zsaiU 

erf ^i nf>ea9ttf[^^ JbAjEBStoli srfi :o cmrre* srit ri.+ i- ^ort^JtlqEOc 
liXoijiH tijaeoaol^ ed:' Io ^fcccf arfif rcvc i-BQUpat &d& LaLnQiii. 

«3Xex aerfo^foO Io X£iL *&eLC aiii iisod.i ro ao t^di •^rsaoioc 

« .00 'jjawXijsH oi'j;?c3l3 teiloL « O3v.;oJtr[0 Qdt aocu Jbeviea er' 

loniM ."'.' 69 -i^I, iQilJaarerii iBdi ;naiX c*x^m.oi&.B Io ootion 

li.f.-: 3£fd teaimoiqaxc- .oD >£':f,IX£fI :t9iXoL * o^isolrfO e.!? t/tjs 

10 9u£;fB6 &:' ^lO ^toi'xiTrJ-i'.inlni/;^ a£ ToniM ,W esnt-aX. rftlv .aiiisXc 

ti .; ajBf/ 0C6> Io CBUQ 9di S£d& La£. ^X-obJEjeooi. ,i9nlM tlOTJcH 



to James 77. Miner, as aiminiatrator. In fuI3 of all olaime 
without the knov^iedge of the pstition^r, JSil •vithout any 
Rctico huvinc been jjivsn petitioner. 

The petition also aver^j^hat the notice required 
"by the Sti^tut3 to b^? jjiven, wu^ served, .>,t>1 filed, in crier 

to establish f.e lien; j.nd -vcvs &;rv9d -nd filed b,& required 
by iai.¥,T5.nd the ".;etition pray»f^tbat Jar.es W. Miner, aiiiin- 
istra,tor ox '^'..t e-tate cf Ilarcld 'Zir.iT, a^csased, and said 
Chicago & Joliet Railway Co. y- ccr.'.oratioii, be rrade p&rties 
defenJunt, arJ. bs required to males ar.HWPr to ;h& petition; 
and that the defendt^nta ^rp.y be dpccesid to p&y the y;etiiionar 
suoh 9um aa he In entitled to, ^.a fees for the ecrviosa 
contracted for."^^^ 

Thi? notice 'hlch n-x^. served on '"he appallco, is as fo.llowat- 
•♦Notice of attorrey'a lien. 

To the Chicago -f Joliet 'Klfe.-ctrie Rrjiisray Company, >. ;^orpcr- 
ation: You ars ueroby notified t',at he undersigned h^^.s been 
retained ^nd employed cis attorney at la;v by Ja/nea •?. Minsr 
as his citto'-n-'^y, b isk, iemand, receive, comrroTiiss i-ril 
settle ;* certain 3uit, clc^.lm, dv"5;r<and i.nd oausH of action 
agaiast ycu for personal injuries rseulting^ in death '^o one 
Harold Miner. 

"You ;^re further nctifiad t:.at in consideration cf services 
reniered and to be rendered, .ve are tc hive and recsive a aum 
equo-l to one third (l/3) of t-:?; amount Tsocv^rsd on account cf 
3u h uit, claim, de.rand an i cause of action; that v.e have and 
horaby claim a lien uoon any vi=,r iict, judgp;.ent, ^eccee, 
compromisa or nettisnient fntered or arrived at, and that 
unier an act of the r'cnsral assembly of the St-ite of Illinois 
entitled "s.n ^ct creating attorney's liens and for the 
enf orcarrient thereof", in force July 1, 1909, you -re to make 
no scttlerrent o" sail claim, eto., 7.'ithout my consent :-ni 
without satisfying my said clain for fees ..ni services. 



.isnoitid-sq nevig osscf anivosrf doii-oa 
btiiup9r ajd fceXi'T Lrii.^ tjsvrea BjSW Ijajg ' [nalX ©rlJ^ rieiXcf^tes oi 

inoi^Jtt^q SMio+ oj*' lawBrtis wtein oi^ l)»bc£Jip9t 'ccf fens '»(fw^ 
s»of«;98 C^;f. Soft B6»St:»«^ «^ilj¥ld-l£d-ftS' Ei srf d 



-iB'tioLlo'i a& Bl x&9ll9Sm&- &di' no i)»vt«a e^wn';. 

-toqxo© 4 »!£njsqrftoO ^.swii^elf. ©i;T*o«ia[;;^#2XoL i?' osjsoXriO erfd' oT 

need e.ari fcengieTaJbrtU eri ' t&df Lafilt&k x'^Bt^ii ei^ uoT :/io .';?■*; 

TsniM ,W eam^sL i(d wax d** y9^i<^-^-^ ss tb'^olqms tti^ t©ni£?srt 

s;*«-6,**i«OTqa!Oo «svX9or5T ^bn^m^£ ^J[eA <t 'iX^titoHis aid t-i 

aoftojs ^0 *»euj^c cn^i JbnJsmoJb titf^ib 'i^xiife 

■-,:<. lvisb Jo not&^ttiblaaQL ' telli#orf tftrfititf ^Y" 

ajue a evieosT ba sLatefetroT 3cf oi hna b9T:9ta9t 

::o Jnaocoja no Istcvoc:; lajj-om.^ srit lo (i^\X) £)nlri+ sr -.'pe 

ha^ av*il 9^ t-ki,ii ;floxJ-o» to eSij&o tftjs .tff<s!«©i \mXjBXo ^d-iL 

,«eooet ,#flo.'flsLi/|; ,^oXi. tftv v:^^ noqu naiX £ ml££o YcToisrf 

t* .' Jtcr*,, ,|#r-i.eTiwc»' to Xfeis^fne !^n©fllfiX^i■«R 10 esimo-xqwoo 

aXoalXil '19 8;fjBj-B «ff^^ to Y-'^cffflSSE':- Xxisceg -srfj ^0 ^oje hp, istni/ 

6ii' uOY t30ei ,X liiwl, eoiol ni ,"'io8Terf.t rfnemeoiGlns 



"Diitsd a-t C'niaago, I^iinolci, tl'iia 31?jt. .iay of Oo-^.ober ^.D. 
1912. Exhibit "A". P-^ycja J. Tucny." 

Tlie no'cice .72.3 ccTVs-i "jy .-.a.iiin5- the ? '.me to rh-^ ?p:^<»l].ee 
Ra.il''/fci.y Co. -ni ^.■- b rfcoeived by 'h£ comps.ny ir 'ue nourss 
of "l.e ruaile. Upon u hcaxin«; of the pe+:iticr, i* rsc.e 
•liamicBei ty tho oourt rc^ ^«.rit cf eqaity; -n^ fron '>!e 
crJler lisraiatsinj^- '.' ,.^ poi:iticn, thiri ap:;eal is t'^Ven. 

It a::;;eiir;j I'roJr '/r.e .'.viainos. t.".'- i; ':>i? '■;on*r:;.ct "or ner'/ices 
to '3e roni^rjd by l\i'^. pi;Miion':;;r, Ar?>.ti niad- ritu Ja-^';;? "^. Mlnsr 
ir^ liviiually; ini no': vritU hira as alniini.i '.:'^.-^,o? o^ t.-ie t:'!t&te 
of Haroli iinsr. l6'J9i3sd; vai -"nat J'..ar.3n ^.. vi.ri:-5r, ■:'?'io, 
eub39qa?ntly io -ru'^^ing tae ccntriot "or the ■aV.t^rney" ?, 
faeo clt-imed, .vas ^ ;.oointai a.-ij.ini-trator c^ "-he c^atc-te of 
H's-roli 'Jiaer, iacsaasd, ico»: not r. -pge-r tc '^■...vt, ■;-,£ such 
adr.ini£)trator, in any way riccg^iiaed, r^.tiried or av;pt?d 
9a i J aoxitr>idt; -,nd that bo f.ir ij '.he f'- state is- oo:v3etn':d, 
ths :.':'itter Tfas left in ths aj.iTiS j>oait]cn :-3 it •scull h-'Vts 
been, if aonre other p-^rson nad "-j^en a.^polntsd adini.ij.etr-'-. tor. 
The Ciaim cf the petlticnei^, IhereTcre, s^ppsars to ">•; ?.:-:aiTiat 
Jp.RiCS 17. Miner in.iividual'.y ; an i tLs notice '?';bich bft served 
Ufon ths appellee is conosming a contract for ^ervicss '.-ith 
J, W. Miner iniivi iuilly; xvA ioes not in. any -vay state, tuat 
he has or exoscta to havs a coi^tract Tith him a? ai'nliiiiStrator 
of *:he eat.ite, not c c .aim against the estate for agrvlces. 

It icea not a^pea-r, tiiat Jc^-n-os TT. Miner ^?-d ?,ny o-^se 
or aoticn or asmand agciinet tLs appelles, vrhich vas oorr ^romised 
or settled, Ani inasmuoh as neith':^r ths ccn^raot, nor the 
nctlce, cover u.ay comcroniieft or ?)ettl:7:'r.ent cr lisii for any 
attorney's feres, ius from the aJminit'.trs.tor of +he estate cf 
Harold V.insr, it^oeasidj nor f -.r any a-jtion, c.ia.in or iet-and 
of said estate "gainst the si.]-.i:.ell5e, the Inra-l V)i-9i£i f::r a 
lien is not established. 



.faoivic©« To^ .a^£;te© ©tf^ ^feax^S-^ sei^^o s Ion ^a^jcd-ee ;. 

Si' T-an ,4"Ci^-:v.-'ao»r &£f" . - iiwi.';jC;--^i. inA .f)9iJ*oa io 

{^ciiJJiiy ij 3i.imO'iciHioo x*.^ 1SV00 ,aoJC;fon 



The evi ience shows aloo, that the service of the notice 

in tliiiS 0^,36 v;a,H "by mail, A net ice to ests-blidh a statutory 
lien, -.'.'here the :r.a.nrsr of service is not pointed out by th- 
Str.tutd, requires a, personal service of auch notice. (Ha^ v 
Ariierican Bortling Co. 361, 111. 36^.) 

Appellant inaiata, that b^auae the aopellee ai^iits in 
his 'gnawer, taat petitioner eervei tiie notica in qussitinn, 
it is not in a position to raise the question of the v-^liilty 
of the acrvioe. We i.re cf opinion, however, *.^iut the admidaion 
ETicroly ralatsij to the i'_-ct of u service of a notice; ani 
docs noc c-iiTiit, that auch service wa'^ in complianos .vith *.he 
rcquirsnients of the Statute, It is riiear, unie':* ^-he ieoiaion 
in the Maj oh-b^ .?upra, that .t psraonai 3?-rvice on ^ppslier: 
of the nctics, .vis necsasary, aa s. condition :)r».c3ient to the 
est -bliahrrent of a lien, if ':he petitioner ha.l one. 

ITor the rcaaona stated, ?,'© a.T(i of opinion hat the court 
dii not err in ii ami i cj inr^ the p^^ition; and the iecres should 
bs iiffirKed. 

Afrivftigd. 



»ol*oft 9d.i "^o soiviee edi- *arf* »08l4B sworfe sonsfrivs srfT 

-'nd y[d fao b»tato(( &oa Bt ©ofvaoa la tsn;; .iieil 

▼ l&S) .solioft rioifc io eoiviea X^rtoai 

(,cat .III ,-I6£; .00 sfiilJfeH itjaoliamA 

^noIJaenp ffi ©ol*oa Bdi tsvise i^rroi^iite -:f 

Y*XMX/?v *fitif lo itoiifet. oeijsi o* ttoi:f; on ox ;M 

Silt iftiw eonjBilqmoo rrl fljbst eoivxat- ' i. ron 8i9ot 

rtoiex6«t'" »rf^ TeXMSy ««j89f& Si *I .«rf^y3'£it u 

7?»IXe^q£ «o 9oivi©« XAXtofereq JS "#jsrf^ ,jBTqi;r. S8£C (;^/ 

jfeXtroae »»TosJb exf.t fcnja jnolcfiteq edf -gtilestrnQlt al itc 

.te., J 

.ijeifnillA 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) ^ 

SECOND DISTRICT. I I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the f-ourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justi/ce. 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. . ^ - -r ■* 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. 

if 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. I 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AUG 1 '' 19]6 ,^ .... . ..-,.. 

the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 

following, to-wit: 



.eorJs.u.L -gaifJiaeTcq ,,8UAH3IH .M MHOL .nc" 

.. .9oi?syL idj^aia aoHAHsoa .noH 



ax belxl sjs';? iiuod srfJ- lo noinxqo erit 

R-'x.yat5 bn.? sb'xow orfj nx ^isuoO bias !!.c "sclllo s'i'foIO sf. 



Gen. No. 6198 

Louis Sohildmiller, appellee 

V8 Appeal from Co. Ct. Rook Island. 

Cigannakera International 
Union of America st al 

appellants. 
Niehaus, J. 

This is Jin appeal by ths Cigarmakers Int-rnational 
Union Ox A.T.erioa, rmJ the Ci^7?.rmakers Int"-rnational Union of 
Amer^Oa Looal No. 301, froro a juigir^ent Tor ^550 
rendered against them Jointly, in favor of 'he appellee, 
Louis Sohildmiller, in the county court of Rock laland County, 
The suit wao instituted to recover for a death benefit, which 
appellee claimed accrued to him, aa i. son of c, dsoeaaed 
member of the appellant organizations. 

( It appeari^rom the evidence that the father of tfee 
: xiry Schil^imiller, was at "rhe time o:" his death in 



good standing as a member of t'.ie ^-^Z-r-r~-r-^ Gi-^armakers 
International Union of America Looal No. 201; and that hx^: 
had been such member for more than fifteen years prioil to 
his ieatha, which occurred on or about February 15, 1914; 
that und^r tr.e constitution and by-laws of the orp;anization 
named, it is provided, that upon the death of such a member, 
a death benefit of i5S0 s .all be paid to any person desig- 
nated in '.vriting by such member; or if hs fails to designate 
a person in writirr, such death benefit shall be paid to hie 
-.vidow; and if there be no vidow, then to hia minor children; 
i.,nd if there be no .-i low nor minor children, o any 
relative of the ieceaeed member v/ho, at "h3 time of his 
death. Id iependent for support, in vhole or in par^ upon 
auch ieceased member. 

It appeat^^fhat the isceased did not designate any one 



86X9 ,oW .nsO 
aeXIsqqr. ^telltaiilMoS eix/oJ 
♦fcfijslal iooH .^-O .oO moil IseqqA ev 

i£ ^9 eoliQtoA lo GciaU 
. e tnsL I sqqjs 

^o aoltiU iMaolSsctr^fal siteji&mtsi^lO srf-t fcfljs ,jBoii©aiA lo noinU 

■ Oeaf nol iaQtn-^ul js ;; XOS .'oH XeooJ lo^tennA 

,«©IX9qqjB srf"^ lo iov£'t ill ,\'XJnJio(; tnsrfit ^anijsgi L9t9baoi 

,X^raJo^ Jbn«X8l ioofl lo i-xssoo ^trmoo srf;t ni ,ieiXiffifcXIrfo3 etuod 

ifolxfw »#il8fl©cf rfi'jesi; jri loJ ^svoosi o;t tatf-x/;tl*ani bjbw Hub srfT 

i»d8£ec8Jc c lo aoB r, a« ,mlrf ot Leutoo& beadsLo sdXXsqq^ 

,aaolt<BSita£^io tfn^XXeqq^ arfd- lo locfmsm 

ariJ- lo tc»£f:^£l erf* jfMt sonsiivs eri* fflottl^ijssqq^ cH ^^. 

nX ffj'jseL^ Btti lo ^^l& 9rft *js 8£# ,ioXXiHiX/Xirio3 ^jrui: : «%--~^^~\ 

^d t^di bsB (lOS .oH X^ooJ jsoXastnA Id coXflU X£noX^£nas;tnI 

o.t ftoiiq sijss^ EiSBtirt fl«rf* ©Tom rtol lecfmsia do«e need f)jad 

;^xex ,ax Y^JEjJxcfal iiso(SJi to ao beizisooo riofrfv. »iBrii-«si eXri 

rtoi:^.a*Xfl«sj5io erf;^ lo Uffsl-r^d ta£ noliuiliBtic . liaLxii; :f^;J 

.Tscfffism « doiJe lo i{;fj8el> exf;t aoqu &sdt ,£)eXiXv07q cX itX ,Xiarajen 

-glasX: rtoait-q y^JS oi- tieq scf XXj^s: a 053| lo tllsnecf riJ^aX. ji 

atjenaXseX' o* eIXjbI srf IX la i^edmsin douB ^d grciitXiyf nX Latf-ati 

sir! o^ tt&q scf XTjeda ^Xloitacf d&^^t doua 3Xl;fXiw aX aoeaaq b 

jnaitXXrfo loalta eXrf o;f xisri;^ ,wo£»Xv? on ecf s^rarfilX fcnjs jwoXXw 

XCie oi nsrfd" .nottXXric lonXm -son woi ; aiarfJ IX Xjhjb 

aXri ^o 9:titi edi ijn ,orfw t sa-csost ariJ^ lo evX^iiXei 

noiu taxq nX 10 elorfr nX «*ioq>.ixe to"! *naX;neqol oX ^d^^ol 

• lacfmem Xoaoisoef rioi/a 
rtoo xciti a^^jTiTSiieaf *oa /:XX taaj^aosi srIJ tfjeri^^tjeaqqi. *I 



in writing aa beneficiary; ani thi^t he left no 'viiow, nor 
minor ^hiliren; but liJ leave surviving him, hio son, the 

f, ,/ho cLiiffiS, that he was partly dependent uron his 
father -or sui'ort. JO — 

T'./o questions a.r- raised on appeal, - first, that it 
affirmatively appears, frort ' r-e svi.isnce in the co>.ae, that 
there is no joint liability of the .vooeJlants; seconily, that 
the appellee wass not in any way Ispendent upon his father, 
the deceased -ember* Upon the question of the joint liability 
it ia urged bv appellants, that there -re two or-ranizationa^ 
one national in jharaoter, and -^he other local; ..nd 'hat tfee 
K;:^tio'.al or^^ani^ation, -tnd not the_ Local organizationos, ia 



liable. ©trt Al.e evidinoe showr^that the local or animation 
is a part of the national or-anization; nd under its control; 
tliat the local or^aniiiation ooiliotei or, and had the 
custody of tne benefit fund out of mioh death benefits v/ers 
payable; and thag national organization c:ontroiled the fund, 
of which the local organization had tr.e custody; that the 
local organization v.as prohibited by the by-laws of the or- 
ginization, 'torn payin^;: death bensfi,tfl, excent by the direo- 
tion of tlie national organization. It is apparent, that 
payrricnt of a death benefit ia effected by t';^e joint action 
of the two organizations; and tl at each had a constituent 
part to perforiri in order to effectuate payrent. Under these 
circumstances the auit .vas properly brought a.gainst both 
jointly. (United Workmen etc. / Zuelke, 1S9 111. 396). 

We are of opinion, u on the question of dependency, that 
the evidence tended to rove, that as a matter of fact, the 
appellee v/as partly iepsndent for sv^Dcrt, u^on !-he earnings 
of the deceased .--ember. T-is deceased T.oraber was y. widor/er, 
and living with the ^.., -< c » , .he ;:. his only sonf^SS- vhile 



srfi ,iioe sill »mJ:rf gjtilvivoue e»y.j^«I t'ir -to ;,'riTtIi;iia__Ton2fn 

tl #fiff;J ,;Jaii'J - ,X«8qq^ no fcSG^ - cno£*esjjp ov;T 
jtjsrfj ,aaj:.!j sri f ni eonsi. iva sri ; aioal «si*3qqjB Ylsvl^Jsmim^ 

,i9rf*jB"5 aid floqu Jnaljnsqst x^w y^^- ^-^ ^^"^ ••-■^' seXlQ', 

sdd isdf Las ilsoQl lafljto ac(,t..Jfc|5£ «73;fo^T:£rfo fli iMoolt^in sa^ 
notd-^sJcojBgTO X^ooi adt JjBilf*%wocf8 '^ '~^ .©Xd^iX 



Q£it bM bas tlQl Mp^^oo nollJ3sifr%^o XjjooX, prftT . *^ J 
stew a^lleascf if*j3©Jb rfo^rfW;; "io, *W0 Jbxml ifXlsn ^ 

^bcjuXsy^ .tQriiiis.ia-&-gzo Isapttsa ad' • ?idja\;£q 

-TO Oil: .0 aw^X-ijcf erfd i^cf L3ilcrirf0'iq ajsw aoii'^sXnjBsio X-sooX 

-o«xXX aif^ Y-p' ;fa©03{ ,uj,.l:i9necf rWisaJb --.nX^e.? .tjoi~ ^noi^JssinAg 

*afl(}; ,^1195-'-. I .0oXd"J5sXn£3io X^iflOii'i:..: - noXT 

OBBdi TQiftU .itnam'^ci-.; o*J3Jj;toi .\3l.io nX mio.liaq p* ,J>',tt£-q 

rftocf tualSQi? itrigjuoad ijXisqoiq a^t d^Xi/a ^Ai aaoasiamuorlo 
.{3Q& .XII SiiX ,8:jfX80S V .0*9 nsmatttoW XsitinU) .v;X*nlot 
;?*ii.-t «YO"9>fc'^a<59X ^o xioXiesjjp od-^ noq« «jrfoXnXqo lo atja a?/ 

'rf.t ,;t'o^ . 1.0 isitJWB JQ 0-3 itjBxi) ,8V0iq 0* XsXfisd' aonstiva ari* 

a^nXflTjas ar-'i noqu ,d-'xc(,;q/U8 lol ^aeJbnoqsX ^Xi-Tiisq aaw eaXXaqq^ 

-lewotXw ;: ajs* todBiaT taa^sot;, ; - Z!" . a ^ " : XiaexsaosX eriJ lo 



eXtdfe 



■i^i^. 3 'iXrto aixf eojw oil. ^^!~lS ei4^„xl:fiw snlyXI bas: 




living with hi a son, and for -^t lea.st two years prior to 

his death, h e ].ii i i -> ^oiKcJ :\j1 — i:.^ Hu^'r? Ivlimd aaixjuxay Djiili ' uAul 

i fl c HI I) iJuH y I - g ■' 1 J L jm a n i ■ ei^rn»g |30 per liionth, for nine month b 

of the y^-a-r j ^ liuL Lu-i-l Ut! ivuti m,c>"ble • ^ l o v.ork iurinn" i.hn .vintor 

over to his aon j^ r.j 'gy yotl /*-^^ 
used II :' ^^ ~"i in for the support of himself, his family and 
household, of ,?hi Dh the deoea,sed was a r-ember. The earnings 
of his fithar was the only money, outside of hie wagee, 

v7hich/^^4^>/*liad or could depend on, for the support of -^ 

himself and family^ jsni - Lhi avl-^swgg i y i'iavvj ' _ut F^";ie J ^ T^Tlm ^ ^ 
was earning at the rate of ^50 per monthj and ir^s^ the amo\int 
required for duch support, varied from about :i!'97, to C^93 
per ir.onth. The father while livin;;^ with the / U ' v ■- .. fze f r^g- . 



ceived as a par^ of kt this family expense, from the fc. - .nAloc 
not only food and clothing, but small inoi dentals, ;:uch as 
tobacco. "9^ 

Appellants contend, that these facts do not show, 
that appellee was even partly dependent upon his father for 
support. But A-e --re of opinion, that they do show, as a matter 
of fact, that the appellee was at least partly dependent upon 
his father, for support. Whether a person is dependent 
upon anotlisr L'or support, is a question of fact. It is not 
neceosary tl^t the iepsndenoy should be the oonsequenoe of a 
legal duty; but it is sufficient if it be a dependency in 
fact. Whether there is such'iependenoy, is a matter which 
muot necessarily be Setermined froin the circucistances ind 
con lit ions presented in each particular case. (Poy^^l League- 
V Shields, 251 111. 350.) 

At th6 titce of the death of appellee's father, it is 
evident, that the wages vhioh he earned, to a aubstantial 
extent, entered into the matter of the support of a-'psllse, 
and his family. The particular extent to which appellee 



o# toiiq et£9s. ovri ta^oL ^-^s xol in^ ,iro8 eid dtiv ^cxtvtL 
W-o'iXi-un 4JwmM»S i..;. I ' A — — ™— — — ; Li ;3T Lni ' r rl ,rfijsefc "Qlil 

^Mirub 3ti \j x -)i' - rior- - — - — — — — — - — —■-^'f- ^x. "Y e xl j lo 

tti£ x^^^tfStt Bid ^^l9Qml'd lo ttoqqjiB ed.' -^tm . xi^ ^-j: ^ - i s ia d Lb an 

^. rot ,ik; tLisoci 10 .^-x'^^-?— ~-™i\-^oirfv7 

"xoi ledtfe^ sid ffoqy ESrrsbffdqsb Y-^^^^a a9vsr a«r e^XXetiqJS Jjstf* 

aoqu xneiJiisqat '^X^ici^ ^fa^jkl *^>i8 gjsw »©XXeqq£ erft ifjeif* ,*b£l "^o 

;Jiis£iiocf«fc' •! aoei&c a. -xsxfvl-srfW **ioqqifa t:o* .larf^^i aid 

j-oa ex i"! *foittl 1:o fl&l^e^trp ^ aX tJfrtoqqx/s lo't ierf*ofi£ o'oqo 

.. "io 9oafiijr'9ea«o-S££i a«f feXiiOriQ ifonsXneqot ©rf± isil^ xta&a&oQa 

ni tofl^ns-QS-t -s 8'^ cM IX tfnsXoillje si ii *0cr d^uX XJagsX 

ifcXrfw r^tiea ^ eX ^xo^sXnsqaX" dowe eX eT»xf:f isifd'stfir .JojsI 

-V2*isJ iVfoH) «<}«£{> '^■cXjtf ox ;^'X£c rio^a ni fcerf^noastq enoX^lXaoo 

(.Oa£ .XXI X5S ,eMoXri2 v 
• ; iX ^lad^^l a*8?»Xi9qq« lo dJ«eX> $fij- lo smit «d;^ ^A 
X^'i: ■• -:d5duB 4J o* ,L©axs9 9<' dt : t^. "^ .J-nsXlv© 



was .iepenient is not iiiaterial. It io suf'^icient if in ^ny 

substantial extent, he depended on his father's sarninR-s. 

One who is suatiined by another , or r:;lies upon his a.id 

in the matter of support, is dependent upon hiir. to the extent 

of that aid. (Alexander v Parker, 104 111. 355.) 

We are of opinion, that the suit in question vtao propely 
appellants 
brought against thexx?sxKiiB«HX jointly; and that appellee, 

under the provisiona of 'he by-lawa of 'he appellant! 

organizations, was entitled to tue death benefit in qusetion, 

as ?. r';lative partly dependent upon the leoeaaed ;r ember, who 

it is aJmitted, had been a member in good gtanilng for more 

than fifteen years. 

The judgment thersfors ahould be affirmedo 

Affirfflsd. 



/ 






T -l O 


^ 




' 










- vy A c X 


V W J ^^^ 


^^ 


:ij idLwj 


. -i,' ■ 


_ e.«^ . 


r + 


'■:■'■ ^T-C7;10 



4-boi'd'JtavL- 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. I I, CHRISTOPHER 0. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oflBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and afBx the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this. 

da}- of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and — 



Clerk of the Appellate Coiirt. 



:*^' 



'ri i.> A-;i\'> .v'HM '«l : .' M::;t' 



if^i. 7<ir .11 !.-'Wjp: 



624 



y 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 






Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourtlj" day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 

i 

within and for the Second District of the ^tate of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Pres iding/just ice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice/ 

, Cler../2 I. A. 4 



CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, 



E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff 



/ 



\ 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AUG 1 ^ ^91^ ^h® opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



:b dtir- :.T no ^^w: ''leri bn^ rsj-if. 

CIX lo st'. iol^iaiQ finooeSi 9ri.t t[o3. . , -' ; 

, . ;^o/i-'^.- ,,: . ■x_ae:t%,, aiHHaJH '.M TlHOb .noH edT- -- i -sn^i^ 

• ■ ; ■ .soit.a-aL, ,aJ¥aira lOPIASSOa. ,noH ,. 






Gen. No. 6345. 

Davis liilk Maohinery Co. a Corp. 
Deft, in erroro 



vs 



A, D. Tappen, Pltf in srror. 



Error to Gruniy. 



Nieliaue, P. J. / 

The Davis LCilk llachinejry, Co. def en.liint in error, / 
sued out 0- '.vrit of replevin-' in tae circuit court of Grunafy 
Co\inty,ti.gainBt A, D, Tappen, plaititifi in error, and T. , L. 
Avery, to recover pqsaassion of a fSjilk filler, and a riiiik 
bottle capper, •n^iola iefeniant in e^ror claiireoL were unlaryfully 
detained by pld'intiff in error, ani aVii 'V, L. Av/ry. 
The replevin ^^rit w;is served on -fcTie plt^:^n t-ir# f irf erro r, :^nd 
the property cientionsd wus t ken from hit. poasesaion, and 



^V^-J.._.,rq.,_ 



turned over to the iDOBseasion of "he ie fen Jb, nt -i n eri reTa 

' ,1 ■• 

Ho service was had on 11, L, Avery, -nd the suit vias aftsr- 
wards, and before the, trial, iiarnissed as to liim* 

Pe^ n lant --i^^-e-r?^ filed a declaru^tion in replevin, ani 
to thia declarAtion ailed a. count in aoauinpsil;, icclaring 
on a promiraory note executed ..n i ielivered to it by 7;, L, 
Avsry. The case nroceeded to trial by jury, who returned 
a verdict sustaining 'he ir-ouee raissd by the ieciaration in 
replevin, finding the cvmerahip and ^ossssaion of the -rocsrty 
ddscribed , to be in the dox o n da. i rt-lTi" terror, -nd asseasing ita 
darragee at ^50. The oourt entered a juigment upon the vsriict 
and directing; that the d^feniant in error- a^ve md retain 
the property replevied; :..nd that he recover of and from the 
plaintiff in error dan.ages in '.he 3uis of CSO,, as f ixsd by 
the verdict; ^x\l the ooato of cuit. 

The plaintiff in error afterwardag- sued out 'his -vvrit 
of error, to r-,:ver36 "rhe juigment; and as a basis for the 



.qioO £ .oO xzeaidoiili afXiU elviiQ 
•Toil 9 ni .iicQ 
.Yi^ouiD 0^ 10113 ev 

jioTis r.x ;tG.-j; ns i?i. .oO Y'i- ninOvSiA ifij;:^ ^iiv^u su'T 
YfcnuiC 'fo jiuoo tiuo^io srft ni 'flivelqei "io j-iiw £ iuo teue 
*J VW Jbn£ ,xoii8 at ill;t^iijlq. «xio-, ~ .'T .* tsnJt£S£,Y*'i"o3 

Xllw'iw^Xnw e%9v be.'nJfcjsXo TOi-xfe rri j-ruoinslst doh^ ^rsqqao eXJcfod 

,?ti\vA .J ,\" ^^^^^ ^"^ ,10119 nl "lli;tni\xq vcf Lenijit9t 

bas ,xo3JX*-i«4--%^^M^tftefq---«rfd-^ no isevisa ajaw tliv ii>ivsXq3i srfT 

iotV ,adr«a»BB6q /Bin Bjotl fl;«i J^ ajsw betiotttt^ta x*'i^[OT:q srf^ 



N 



-isrf-lfi B^K tiua 9Llf ta^ ,^evA .J .W no t£[i ajBW soivise oH 

.mid ot a.0 toeeimeli .Xjsii:* srf;t sioltscf in£ «a£>i«w 

tftjs ,aiT9lqsi ai noi^j^iJsXosX ^ teLll i^ii-Ta- -fti— *«£t«srlefl 

§nii£lo«i ,*iaqmi;en±: ni icsjoo jd Jbeir^ noi^^ijsXosJb eid;)' o* 

.J .W Yd Ji oi teisviisi tn^ Jb&;fu09x© ©*on x'^oc: laioiq £ ao 

bsaiuiot oAn ,\:'r£J(; Y'^ Xifit* ot ieissooiq sbjbo sriT .^^^^A 

ni noi^£i-fc-I.csj. oxi.t i{c^ tsaii;! seuccl ©ri ' 3ni'ni£*3JJ8' "itoiitev £ 

vtisooiq sdf lo noieaseeoq^ tn-b qiriaisnwa ©rfd- gnitnil ^nivoXqea 

aii gniaseae^ fcnA ,toii9-rri -*fftBfe«e-i»t silJ ni ad od- * xisdiioaii; 

jfoif tav 9ii" i:oqjJ i-flfsm^iuQ £ teisd'as Jiuoc srfT .05f *£ eesjaTUBf) 

atjufer Lnj? sv^jrf aoVa©-ui-ij3vfcJ-se4ei srf? tadi ^n^^^-^^^ ■^'"•^ 

aiit atoil in£ lo lavooci srf ^jsn';?- tn^i (iolvaXqai Y^^a^o'^'-'i ^^^ 

Xd tsxil e£ t.oe'i "io aiuc 8X.^ ni aag^in^ loiia ni 1*ii:tni£Xq 

.iiuQ Io a*8oc s.-f? bn^ jJoitiev erf* 
^iiw eirf ■ iuo LeuB -^BluawiedljB loiia ni ^■ii:*nii:;Xq eii'T 

:,0 8ia£d j3 84$ tn£ ;;tnofli3Li/(; Bi-:-" oe:t©V9i: oi 7,aoiis Io 



/ 



writ, ixa^i^^aarthe follo'.vinr; (itroxT,; "Firet the court erred in 
entering juigraent without urn'sarc^-noa or plea oy the plain© 
tiii in err-jr, without is3u<i bciinr; joinedj i-ni r7ithout iefault 
having been sntered i-.^e-lnat plaintiff in error. Second, 
that aciiJ. ju;ij;jnient ia oon'^r-iry to 1«vt. " Ths record, however 
does not :3u3tn.in ths olaim ;i-,de by plaintiff in arror, in the 
arrora xi^Bi^ned. It ahov;s, that v hen the case waa ct-lled for 
trial u, on iaauee •\<jLi.&:] by the pj.i'tii5a to the auit, the 
partiaa appeared \)y thsir j*eapeotive rtttcrneya; and, that 
thereupon a jury was oaD. lod, .^ai ov/orn lo try the ij!auQ0 
joined; una to r nisr a truvs verii^st in aocordanoe -vith fke 
svii3nc5. 

In t^'iR i^baenaa of .- bill o" v^xoeptionj setting out 
the viienc'i, :^.t muat be preBornea oor^oluaivoly, that the ver- 
dict, rthioh l.hs j'-J^y rc-r.iersJL, v/tta au3t:;,ined by tho svidonce 
ad luc e d at iYis trial. 

It 3osy not wppe.ar frorr. ths r^^oord, tliat ?. I'orm?.! 
pl-2a v?ai' fil2d, but ':hi£ jc.oi-ot b- ^osignei for error, if 
the parties ^glunterily prooGeieJ to l-xiul without ^he for- 
mality of -u plas.. I93uf^ ccullbi j.oinod in '.he case without 
the filing of guch a plea.. It ;v.-u held, in one of the 
earliest oaaea ravXi^ssl by our Juprcaii Court, that tne ap- 
pearance of the ptvrtiSG iv- a o-i.ae tr isd, cured le acta in 
pleadings arigintt frcr. a f.iilars to file a plaa. (Eraazl« 
V Usher, Ee-jcher's Brea^o, 35.) And it i3 the settled rulw 
of law in this stito, t'xat if parties allow a suit to go to 
trial, without filing a plea, or viithout fonr.al iasue; or 
without fcrral pleadings, the error is cursd by the verdict. 
(KosB V Pei 'ick, 1 Soifl-. 73; Armstrong v Mock, 17 111. 138; 
Spsncer v Langlon, 31 111. 193; Kslgyy v Lamb, .11 111. 53'"; 
Loomis v rliley, 34 111. 307; Devine v Chicago City Ry. Co. 
337 111. S80. Cook v City of aJaraeilles, 139 111. App. 536; 



£ 



-snii.- , arfJ ^c j*9Xq to s.oxi^iJBeqq^ ^roriitlw d-fremjjLuJ, ^nl'ss^as 

jtaoosS .'«nT9 AX lliitni^Iq tsxrijsjii.- Jbeisins nssd gnivii-f 

srf? 02 ,^0116 at llt&aisLq x<^ atj^^iE ml^lo oils ni,h*Bj/6 i"oa esot 

... »*jtufej ©lit ot e*ivt . . .. 9Qur,zt no-^JU XjbItJ 

sifr if:?2¥. ^otiJiLiotioh at *ci. .. ;JborTio(; 

-^.. . . . .ia!.::c..; 

•;:-o as tl .4: SniXi: 

-cfi &■: , cre^c lesiXiJSS 

jijt «:fo?;'9l bsTiJ , C'oajsTijsq 

'slut tslJfee fc '.' . '"C ,rr.e3T5 2'r^::o:''^-I ■ 

Oy- OS ait fitff -.-.,. ,.^. 

10 ;»ijesi: I-:'i:!, ;'c;o;-fJI.. ic .j;3iq. js -^alLVi iuqtiitfi ^1aIi& 

;55X .III ?I ,ioo« V ^ . , (SV .acp8 X .jfoil is^ y aaof) 

;0C2 .I:T I!: .C'-'J r YVzr:T ;ESX . TfT t? .loXgncJ v isonaqa 

.oC . . , . .YS-^-t^ V elmooJ 

:atr» .noA -frT Pi, Vr.-in .Qflfi .IlT V££ 



Firat Nat. Bank v Miller, 139 IJl. 60S; affirrr.cd in 335 111. 
13S.) 

It ia quite apparent from the veriict of the jury, that 
the count in aasumpsit, v/hich was imcrcperly adiei to ^he 
declaraticn in replevin, v/a-s wholly disregarded in the trial 
of the caae; -.nd that the issue tried was upon the alia ations 
of the iecl.vration in replevin. No objection \raa raised 
by the plaintiff in error, in the court hslow, to the im- roper 
joining of the assumpsit csuid count to the ieclaration; 
and therefore- thie question r^hich is argued in plaintiff in 
error's brief, io not really beiors uaj and there is no 
assignment of error concarning it. 

The rcoord ioes not disclose any r-i'veraible error- 
and the judgment ehould therefore be affirmsda 

Judgjxient affirnnod. 



isael^rt bjsw . loot Siii lo 

Hi tlt&nlf^Sti ai i-sus-v noiJaeup aldt ©nolaisrf' 

Off al sisif.t fcfljg i^a e*o1c«d vjll^ei Jon ei ^^eiad s«ilott9 

.ti siiin^sowoo ions lo Jtnsmnsias-B 
•'lOTis sXcfiai ;.»olofiij -TOOSTt »ifT 

^ Jb s rtfi £ i'ia d" ft a tESi.; t/L 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ( 

SECOND DISTRICT. ( ^^" I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my ofBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and aflBx the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of oui- Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk, of the Appellate Court. 






•ii i.f 



/'( *" r.UV7 i(i I jf! 



t.itj; ivvf: 



e 



fe ;;: 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, %^, 




'S!S^w5i5,;Ho--*<»«- 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the\ fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of t^he State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. JOHN M, NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Just ice J 

I 

Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice! 



CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. { 



E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff 



f*J -T; 



~r 



/} 



r^ ST 



\y 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
AUG 1 n 1916 the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



^ 



it-i:^^ ' d + iuol 9fl* ,YJsb3buT no ,£Vf£iiO is hied bns nu^gsS 

:-:xia bns b^ibr.vci onin bnssuoci^ sno bioJ luo ^o ifieY srii ni 
fonilll ^0 e'B:t8 srf'? lo'toiitaxQ bnoos8 erf* TOl bns nirfJiw 

-v^TaiiL -sfiifcxas-Tq ,8UAHaiH .M MHOL .noH edT- - ^fneseiq 
.9ort3uL .aaWilAO .L aHAUQ . noH 
.eo-^^^I;L ^JJaaiQ aOWAilflOQ .noH 

V K',-?io ,Yiiua .0 aanqoTBiaHo 

: ■ • .J^:tedS ,8IVAa .M .3 



no :iiw-oi ,8bi£, sdJ ,aaH3aMaMafl Ti aa 

ni belli -^jsw jtugO s.U Id aoiniqo &ri;t 

29iD-gil bn£ abiow ^o.i ni ,j-ijjoO bi£E lo aoillc a'llisIO srfif 

:Jiw-oJ- ,-§rTiwoIIo^ 



G&n. Ko. G347» 

Hi-i'ty Allis-cn, appellee 

ve ArpSs-l froA^ Bccnc* 

EelviJKrs Gcri:;';- f^ Machine 
Co. c.,:(:ellu,iit. 

Ki'^haua, P. J, 

Tfj9 uoXsilee, II-:;r.ry Allison, brpaght this ajlt to 

\ 
recover a. bj^lancs- claimed "to be lue h.lm, is a screw nachin"^ 

operator, ^or r^ages, froni ^'ne Eclviiere Scrsw & ;/j.ohins Co. 

aprel]Lant. The c-se v7aa priglnxlly brought before a just^isre 

of the peace, in Boone Covtiity, v.'here t're A.r.peliec obtain??! 

juJgrr;9nt icr ':"ns full amount of his ierrani, rari sly ';!:69.60. 

An ippecl was taken to t::.e ciroult court, --ixA a ;juTy t-i^.! 

ha,d, which rssulfed in a ver iiot in\fi.vor of arpsliee for 

|50. The appeflat:t .Tvi ie u mction for V 3::e« trial, ,7hich v-j-s 

overruled by 'he :;ourt, :i.nj a- judgireint A-i^'a. entered upon th- 

veriict/ frc^n vhicih ^ui^Tisnt t.:e appellant pi-paeoutsD thia 

apoG'-il, 

It '.<as conceiei in t'.ie courl; bislow, that the sr^^T^^^Wrets — ' 

had .orked for a^^^-f'-tigcn^ 196 hours, "or Vvhich iie had not 

bsen paidj »ni f.\at the w.>,ge3 :..?. received Tor .vach -.vcrk "raa 

at the r>Ate of 35^ per hourj vhi oa a-ouI 1 i^inoiint to the iiura 

of ^:68.-.0; but .--r^fidiiaftt clai.T'Sd tr.at t.])e gp-ellocy in his 

employ/nsnt ;i.a -^ screw ir^achine operator, in turriin;: out boine 

ks&iR bushings, T.hich the ^^ppGllant had a oontract fco rr,anu- 

Caoturs ..■..n ; .laliver to the Fox Haohine Co., had Jone yome of 

hii vork i^feotively; r^hich r-.aultoi in damages to 'ho -^pfelig """"*- 



1, to the ivmount of ^37.45; .ni sought to r'^coup these 
di-Kagee, against t:.2^o,ffiovint ainitted to be iue a * :">flll ee<. 

Appel - j -t tnt coiTts^ndg^tJfat the judgii.ent ahouli bs re- ■ 




vgraed, fOi- l.vo r5a3on8^xI'I>^, oscr^Uije tlae vsriict on the 



• caood f«ioTcl I 



• iri^XXsaq-fc. .oO 



wrtJtxfOJsm weioa a «jc «iBl|i our. ©d oi" i>OHil«IPy'8onsIjscj i; asvoos'i 

a»l38fj(; * Sloped ifriguoio Y^^-^^^'^^ftsii*^ e^w sa^c siiT . it rijix I o ti qjs 
tenlB^do osllaqr/ii ea,t siariw ,te;J-^j;/oO ©nooS nx ,sojs©q srfd- lo 
, 03.081 \t-t9'S£n ,tfljei!9t aid Ic tfu/orrr-ft Xli;! srii lol taem^-jl 
l^l-i^ Xiul £ tajt- j^tjwoo idutnilz aid o* aQ:i*ii 8£W I^SQij;. rrA 
lo'i aaiisqo* lo lOVxVni ^oitisv £ al tatlueet xfoiriv ,Jb£ii 

ax;iv a©?x;o«a^^ #fl.gICscc£ o::'^ it cis it^si u j; rfoiffw moil sj* oil zsv 

- .-->^3:.V -, 

?>©X £ a qq* : 3:;. j-tfii ^wroxa:, .. iwoo -. tZ 

ton bxtil 9ii A' '"' tSTiJorl 39 1 ja^i- ---:.-i= lo i x/sXzu. i-^iu 

aid ni i -^^ ;.-.--> ^t^ axfj Jjent £>9mi£io ^ita9*i-«^i - :rijtf (OS.oc^ ;o 

- "'OB ©not fcjari ,•"'" •-''.Q^fe /?..,■ lavlXsi. f hj. ©■iuioxi:t 
f;.^-^- ©rr oi- cftSJBJtt). :. — . {leviJoslst iao- .. irf 

•'- '■' -^ - ' , . tnx/oin.^ 9di ot « Jwiti - 



, d>T:'xiSv: 






-ueation of dairiageB *•• .iiy.nlf estiy a^^ainst the -veight of the 



eviisnce; ind seconily, tht.t ^hB court erred in p-ivinp; the 
first inatruction requested "by the .--t- . i JUcc . 

A-^-TT^rrirtpfti; urgea^, th:a.t the jjury in their verdict, allov/ed 
only about ono h^lf o'tho acr.ount of iaroagos cl^.imed in recoup- 
Bisnt^ and that the vsriict in this reopeot, .S- againiit the 
T.eight of the eviienoe, bsc:-.uoe fhere was no controvorsy 
as to the amount cf ths dan.a.gea'' occasioned by the iefsctlve 
Tork; that inp-smuah as the jui'y allowed about ill8.00 of the 
■- I- ^ i - i " 1 n» ' ■; claim, they must necsssarily have ione so b-^c-^ use 



they considered, thut :->^ri|^l"i"nt h^d oroved his C2.ss i-r'ainst 
r.g i . Jlloo , 3o f:.r :-a lofsqitive work va3 conc-,n*ned, an ^ there 
being no iispute about ,^^37.45 beinri; the amount of dan-tagec 
the jury, according to ths proo*, should have allowed that 
aim: in full. . / \ 



. , It a.'oearg from ths evidence, that the vrork ^.'hich 
• -.^:'-ulloo had to io '.vith rsf crsnoe to t".e article rvanurCuctured 
for the Fox Machine Co., -tas to irill an i reani a hols in a 



certain part pf bushings; :.nd the orocf teni^ tc show, that 
the hole drl'lled in sorr^e of the fcushingB trx^ larijer than the 
apeoirications of the Fox Machine Co. called for; ^ni too 
larr:c for/the ase the Machine Co. deaired tc "rake of ths 
bUiihinge/; and they were therefore returned toN- aobj: lart by 
the :tiaohina Co., c^nd a c>icdit was allowed the Machine Co. 
for tas sum of C37.'I5. 

no/t. sustain the cW.bsntibn of 
the amount of d^/^38 suffered 
by a;p^lan\ is clear an;^ un'^rsptrir**: '^'Jhs re 't^<^ proof 4 n the 



Th\ record ho'.'.-ever 
appellant that the proof 




that the cost of the rf:ateri;,ls and labor on the 
m-^nufaoturedi articles returned to .i'--^s=s;5=FEr?f, .vaa C37.454 
but this rtiibne dajinot >e' considered, in fixing fie .-reasure 
of d itagee, ina3muc^><^3 the ' a pellant has become repossessed 
of the manufactured artidies. 



2x,^i£ XiiBeJ-JtojiTi ■9t a-- 



'10 aoliaeup 



3«ivl>^ at ic 



,'{Xinooi 






~ '"-■ -»-* — - j!ka c 



^ 

" fcsvoi 



a 6; 



,ao native snt to Crisis. v 
'm/oiife S!-.'? o^ a^ 

\mtjsl o tr*ttti t£ roAa^ 






'BOTa TS'- 






.00 ©airf^slif xo'' 

.00 snjfcffoi iol ffStcjsX 

.^3f.^'i^; "^0 SUI8 sri.* lol 

d-onrc^ antfiii aid.^ ;fucf 



;ea3i.i; 



\ ■ ^ ■ . 

- fli^-ag>h Lfowx^ s^-fi.^4-*r*n4U-* Buporintcndent» the only '•vitneet 
.'ho to-^tiricd concerning \thp' value of tlie (nanafactured 




articles returned, 3aid^;^,t1j&t the only valus which the ar- 
ticles returned v.-ouii have fcr sale , ^voull be for junkj but 
he also a^id tiiat he /ail not knovv how much in iollara and 
csnte, tliC vu.lue ct the articlee woulCKbe for this pur .os' > 



Tharc -^ w' or<5'or th..: tee art. .:ea iright or, m' .nt not hi.\.va 

^ / n X 

uny v::ia3 v<-'-' "iny otnt our , aS. I . \ 

/ X ^^ 

Ti^ !!,a,tter of v/hat\ .ae value oi "rhcj articles Returned 

/' ''■. . - 

to u.v;Oelip/nt, and rstained by it, had in ipjlars and oents, 

".Vio a riscessary factor inestii^;a.ting corro.otly the amount of 

i.iin.a.ges apyeiiant was er.titlsi toj and in that ^t^^-te f 

UJ:ic3rtc;.inty in tiic proof in t::at r8ga,r,d:, the jury nacarBsarily 

were lelu to conjecture concerning \l; his f^s-turfe of "^he caee; 

X 
ani ;ai& court i2 in the Sams prsdi,6$.rBsnt. '^fe cannot Si-.y, 

therefore, t'aat ths jury :l.i i not arrive at a cropsr conclu- 

eion conoerniug the -tatter of fa© damag^ssj ani .clearly -.'jculd 

not 03 juatiiied in iisturblng th=; veriict of the jury on 

that .icnouiit. / \ 

Concerning the other error assigned, appellant claitris, that 

appellee 'b first instruction, in the sta-ndird of oornourioon 

st:^ted in the instruction, omits the element "of '^■•.achine -^ en 

who ure engaged in that/particular kind of "-orlc''; ani there 

is Torce in the objection mads concerning this de'fcot in 

the instruction; but it is equally clear, tha,t.ths jury were 

not misled by this $rror, concerning the questions '.uiiah they 

determihsdi \::.rA it ie jianifeat also, that the error .Touli 

not have had c^ny .Offset on the verdict of the jury, concerning 

the qusstion o^'' the amount of damages to "be asssdiaed 

in the :T,d.tt8r dZ appsliant's reooupa:ent. So the error •.■ra.e 

harmless, axil the judgment should not be reversed on that 

account . / 

The^e beir.g no rrvarsible error in the record, the 
^ud^iisnt glaauli be affirmed. Affirmed. 









jOw ssioidT 






r^ 



;rfJo X^"' 



so T^v^ s 



'OXtt&V 



^*- 






idtuielt ex J Bis I ©tf *<«ll 

s^d- - 3aifltcoOrtoO 



i' ao d-c5:'''.:lt- '{^"f*^ ^-^^ 3V£:r ton 

,;. 8 91 ax's JEiri 
. fnuooo-a 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. ( I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of tbie State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing- is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oflSce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my band and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



e 



^^^jai'fc'-VM-: 




AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fifth day of October, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Pres iding- . Jus t i ce . 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice. 
Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Justice. 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. '^I^ 1^ X»A« 4 QO 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

At^-j n 1916 ^^^ opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ares 

fol lowing, t o-wi t : 



.. . - : :1 baa boi 

aioniXil j.o aieigieril '. 

? — .<^' i'"*- ■*" & 
• /•'■*. i 11 ^/";^«^i .:^i9io ,Y^'8:ua 



Gen. l\To. G349. 

Bonjamin Lounsocrry, uppsllant. 

George Boger, Excr. ^;,ppeilee. 



Appeal from DuP^v^e. 



Nieliaua, ",J, 



In Ihit) .lOtipn a -.vrit of r--plevin -AaTa ausi out in 



the oircuit court of iXiP'-C^ County by i-fi'e a-neilant Her.jamiri 
Lounsberry, .,>.ir.3t t'..'~ \] oqI'j s^., G^ox~a Roger, 33 Fx*Gutor 
0"^ LuQ estate of Albart GrrX^t, /fsooaaed, to rfioovor tho 
pooseatJion of u prorai-"3ory noAe for the orincipal ^\xr< of 
$1,000, -.vhioh appellant yrlairr.ed\ was ionated to him by (he 
Jeceased, Albert S.-iiart', rricr to\i:3 ieath; :-r\i '.hich -ha 
Executor </u»i .ron^^-iully ^/ith'hol iinrj^rcm him, A d-rt.i.n.i hai 
been -uie on t'-ie f.xsoutor fcr -Ls note in ougntion, ;rior 
to ti"i& oomniencsiT.ont of ths auitj -.nd \.ho Executor rsf use 1 to 
give up tus note, en the ^jround that it was ?. part c " the 



aseots belongin.^ to '•lie satita of Aibs-rt S'T:art icoeaaei. 

Tie iecl-.\ration s- ir ti;ft uaual , orm in cases of replevin 
but >i count in trovsr 4'iS a,dded. The — =^^^£^©3, pleaded not 
r;uilty, non ^^fct , nun ;^H. Lw i« urt ^ ..nd ^ j oo plaaied a^ 3i:eai:.;,l 

plea, a:.iegln-, prr.perty o^ \..:o ne'e in ths .■rn,.-'i?'n"ei^, ...s 

A 

Jfexecutor of the oat.te cf Alb', rt Siart, L'-oeassed^, On Ihe 

triul of the cu.ae bv the court, the itee^wE^se -xas found not 

guilty;} -^ni 'ae court rf.n icrea juigrtient in conformity with 

thiy ririiing, cni lor :;cut6, ..- iJxinat the Jfs^^^tftTkt • -Stee— 

A 

iior.ftl i ^nt hyjnpra — UT-e--esr3': "tno " thi*--<jOiU;-t ■©»• fc'-^es,!;-^ i,0-^-r^ 

<tdia...j u j,gri!eixt.-,x.!:icLiaxa;jL.« .^ , 

The note ch;.iiriSi by ^ ij * j J uun t , Ws the one decstiised had 
t-hen in hiii lif--? ti.re, from : le akers, W^ II, Ilsrring, ITil- 
li;i!n ErycB, K. W. Mijrtin, G. H. Heartt, and Jo'isnh Batterh;i,ir. 
It '.yu8 iatsd December 13, 1905^ payable i-t one year after the 
date, and betirin?; interest at six per oent '^er arinum* 



,Q^ikd .07. .fisO 

.9©XIsqqj3 .10x3 jia^oa sjjioaO 
at iuo bi$ijs 8>^ ixiv«Iq©t 1o, li-sw Jt. aoLio*^ Aidi al 

\ / 
^o inuB lijqlonliq Off J lol ai^ ifior-.-imotq ii lo floiaa'OBaoq 

9d:i x<^ ffl-^^ o^ bd&£ciol aj8V? vBsmJt^rs J-rtsXIsqqjs riolrf-v ,000,X| 
«ri-' do 1x1'?^ in-; {rf*js«fe ola o;^ loitq ^^^^niS itadXA tiioa^oosl 

JLjirf Ln^.T.^'i; A Uffiiri taox^r jjflitlorfif^xw XlXx/^notyv b*>v, to^*/osx3 
Toiir: ,rtoid"8Sup ffi p&oa scii lol so^i/oex3 srli' no si^rr. nssd 

aclJ *o lijsq J6 a.sw #1 Jf-sfft ^Odots 9riJ no ,s;ton Qui qu ovig 
.i!9e£©09i ^lafffS iiBdXk lo eS^ieo Bdo oi ^ni'.qnoXacf a^sasa 
nlTSlqeT lo essiio nl miol XanciJ sdc? ni ^arf; noi^iiT^.IosI srrT 

ton baJbeeXq .ff^&^ft^^: sr^T .ietti; &st "xsvo^j ni inx/oo jj fud 

ion trjjol ajsw 9S^»«¥#« ©rf* ,cl"xuoo edi ;c( ae^o 9n',J lo latii 
rf;t-- ■ ' 'rtoo ni JrieiusiiJt batai a^i f-xsjoa srit Ln^ tvitlijjft 

'••-'>-? K 

— 5^- , i-iis^^^Aik^ '^ii;^ i»atj^::^i .Ataoc -jo't tas ,:sn tic: !'■ stdi 

/•■. * 

i<4:ii irjsijsosi. ©no 9r(,t i^^i; , itmnf iWar vd temliiXo sJoa etfT 
- .' ^W ,ttiajffa«r ©lij- ffloil ,siii:^ slil siif ni ns:.^ 

<**«A: . .'"• ." ,H ,aovig miili 



a-ni it Jsf» ooncsdod, that unleaa tas note by gift causa, morlia 
Psaaed to ".-..s ' ^. ■ " '■ o i la trt^ it v/as a part of !he u-sseta of 
the estate of Albert S.-art, J = cea3si» 

ThG ieceaacd, Albert Sn;arta» iTa.3 a bachelor, .vno, :-t 
the ti.rtc of his death, inj or n nurabor of ye\re pricr thereto 
had lived on his farm, v.hlch ..u.3 loo .tei in DuPti.re County. 
SaralViLounaberry, u ooujin cf "t'le Jeceased, vue hi3 hou::eke3per. 



•atjuLounaberry, u ooujin cf "r-ie J 



*»««. ; j=T^tmtt ft4 ivho -vaa a brcthor of ?:„rah Lounsiberry, hr- ji aleo 
.vorkei for the Jeoc-sed a nuaibGr of ye-irs, ao a lurai hand) 
ani '.vao ao smployed at he ti-ne of he isath of th.e isoeasei. 
The deceased kept the note in question, vith other notss, 
and valuable p -.pera, .vhich he ©'.-.Tied) his .'.'ill -..ni 30ffie of his 
mo cy. in > lin -ox, .vhich he K.e;t lo;;ked, in a necrstaryi, 
or .ieak, in hiu be.i roorrj _n i -'be kaya .'or 'he locks on the 
aecretary anj t.hs tin i.cx, v/er: on a ring, •vhich the isceasel 
was in l.he "•abit of carrying in his trousers pockstsf -^urin^ 
his sickness, the keys rere k = pt in the saine place. 

Two days after the death oi' the d-- ce^usd, hia two orot her» 
with t'.vo other rrien, cu.!:ie to tiie house oi" ""he iece'-sed, to take 
charge of hia efTecta. T ^y found the tin oox icisatai icoked 
in the secretary, ;^.ni ^he keys tc Oi:en it, .rere on tlie key 
ring as aeual, in thiC pocket oJ •'.he trouijers of *h- it^cesiged, 
in the 'Cl rooiri^ -..n i •■ren the box w^s C:.:8rK^d, Ihs note in 
question :.^n found amon^ its contents, -..hiah consisted of 
valuable papers, other notes c:msd by the iooeased, to sther 
oith .r.oney in his pookettoook, uni his List vill. The tin box 
and contents wern t..ken pobsssaion ofj by lie brothers, :..nd 
then subsequently tarned over to .x j i iiti'm. , as -J?^xGcutor of the 
eatate* 

liie legal quc3tl>on3 invy^Tved in the caQ© r:re practically 
the jams as thcsie passed u>sOn' by this :^ourt, in the cigs of 
Lounsberry va Bo33r, Exeoutor^vin 19b 111. Acp. ;i84 . In 

/ 



J, ^ 



< YTT^ SCT" wo J grfjClfiS 
"2 *l# 



• XiajooO o'3Jti^i/Q aJt isiaool b^v' rfolrfw' ^mijal exrf no fcs. . 
o9£s ted ^XTTsdaiwod dsvuiB lo "tndjoi 

.isefiso©! 9dt to dijsst drf ' "lo eml : ,; fc9'{oIqme oe e^w tn£ 

,a9;fen Tf-K;*o ff>tx?^ \£toi&Qeu9 at e*on ©rirf' ^qsjf Lsajssosi srfT 

- ■ *■-■ '■ '- '■ ■ -;-' ' • .. no: . , ,- - ... 

aiil lo saioe ' --^ axrf fi)©rTvo erf dotii^. joasq/jq sld^jjljtjv cnjj 

I:»8£»oet srf* doxriw ,3flit ^ no atit ?»f<+ bn.-^ >fif.tei098 

giiiius'^lBi'aiooq aa^aaoa* miii ai ■gatx'siJio ■>:; 

.»S£lq 9m*iB 9rf+ fri >t«sV «t^ jSesa^. ie siif 




Hi eJ 



55rft tiflUO'' 



>jjooi ni 



^JJC 



,e#ff«»^noo sii snomxs liturol e.Bw aoiitssup 
astorr iarf,to «oaoq£q si'cf,auX48V 

vo Jben 

^isdam/oJ 



ti. -t c-ce, riotfiij oimliii-r to '.. .2 o-.e in jor-.troveruy .i^re .'.nl 
sifflilariy enaoraei, wore iaini^i. fey S.;.rah Lounco'^tT-y , =is 
.:. ;2-"i^* from tlic J.ec!?,iiQei oata^ga mortiii . Toi= jcurt helJ in tl.at 
caae, t:it-.t tr.s gift -.^.ie incoiT:f\cte :.i;c ■. uae of t-.he lack cf le- 
liv^jry 01" ti:'e notes jiairred, in ' '1^ lif? ti;r.e cf .0 ieceaaeJ.. 

Tue -ri.i0r3S;r,3nt on t lie note in Ciucation, ,^^n rcuini in +.hc 
tin box, by t!iS brc'/nerd oT S;; .ieceadci, .Vo.-. .la ^'ollo-.vo: •'If 
this note ij net .ciid until my ieath, pay to Pftnjumin Louny- 
berry, (Signsd) Alb.rt Sn.i^rt" . j Thi ^ \f. icrst^/t'^nt :5l3arly 
in iioatea, t'l^t it vaa ^\e. int-^rtion o;" Hi'/ icog--sei, t;o h^^v^ 
fae title to the note pasr. tu the u. .'ni:/nt"X.iftsr Uis ie^-th, 



Hcv;ever;xa.j;>^lla:'it in tbiffx^-sie seeks to establiah 



of the ^ift rn queotl&Ln by /ha r^sjtinjony of 



;livery 



Sarah Lounsbsrryv 



A- 



"49^;. testiried^^ a.t .-bout i .»-^k crier to *:hc isath cf Albert 

Sinartgf'he requcoted her o oj.11 tlie :i . . ufe jsktitfe -t , Benji-min 

'1 
Lounoberry, to 'he aiok rocffi, '.vhich ..ha ii.ij ^^n:l t" -xt '.?fi&n 

a{i>P»>i - *ti > n i- catTiO, t-ic ieoeaaed oiii to him, in hsr preaanoe: 

"Ben, I xovA think I -viil live r my i.yaj :.nl nov I .viil ^ive 

you a tlioua.ni iollarsj ni I ..ant you to ur>e it tow-.r is the 

purchj-ne o.' a hon^e; ni I .vill le-ve it -ith r'arah) -ni -he 

will ^,ive it ':o you ^ftcr he rujieralj" and *:bat aftcrwaria 

he f^ave her t.ie koya to th- tin box, cont'-ining *: °, note 

;".ni other property of the iscep^oed, fiaying, "This ia yours 

now^ Keep the secretary looksd^ ani :xft--r I air- t--p. '-n out ^ ^ 



lock the room, ...ni l-^t no on.- enter 'be room. 



Sh' 






she then kept tb^e ks^s in ler pocket, .•««d put the tin 

box ojick ii:to tlie at=cretary, .ni lo(;h-:l ;..s secretary; th':.t 



the iecea.Be i ^ii not -dk or the k-:y3 :t,>in, n(;r 'u-ive thsjn 
after tha.t "-iTiej" that ahe kept "i.G geys in her poiseaaionj 
but unlcohei ■ b:. secretary to %-^\^. out thint-.^ or him, now 



)ti\ 



bon, ..i.sn b3 wunte 



.em; 



.^ LI.»II1« 



~^Z^^"^io tin box -.fiu,© net unlocked aft-3r t'-.at "ii^ej but that 

just o3fore the brctners of the i'?cea3ei Cxme to take chi^^-r^e / 

^ 









/ 









.■J. _ LJ. is I ^-.JV. X -.. 
X , - i T 









' <^ -""-■' ■■■• 



fli;f arft ■tiircr iaflh.. ^w-v.. 












.^a^;:.' 



x/oJ 
IK 






o os£dorwq 

-••I5 Xliw 



^ai.J»a; 



/•^ 



qosS fwofl 
,;!i^w]. sn.t ::(ooX 

o;tuX i(o<<J xocf 



of ths effeot© of the ieceased, s e iro pe 1 "^he ke^a back 
into ths trousers poclcet ci 'r-a leceased, '/hsre ^:'°,y f cui: j tliem. { 

A"Jj^umin~ thid tr;stimon> of Sarah Louhsberry to r s t-ue, 
it is app^ent, t^-t if '■a- i^^ceased ini.enie:i t.:at the .-^iyoel- 
lant tjhouid ^Have the iii.^r.e ^.l^ite pOHs esse ion ani c-rnerahip of 
the note, Me >voui^ h.^ve pixsae.l it ovt r to appellant -t the 
time lie toli him he -Jm^uli give it to hin;; anJ inasmuch, aa 
he 111 not, io 90, it tsrir^ to show t at he Hi nob inteni 
that appellant ahould have \^e note t-t that time. T'-.e iir- 
eotion tbut C-arah Lo\in3berry -.vilK^tc deliver the note to 
the apjeiiant aftor the funeral, ai^bs^xcludes tie inf-.renoe 
that the ieceaaei int-^nded tia a;.r ellanV shculj h..ve it 
before dca-ya. 

Moreov-qr ti;e iireotlon [',iven -;sr-3ly emphaaizes, •hs.t 
W8.3 already expressed by the en>ior3er<.ent on t'ae note itself. 
The nota wrxa not separated from the other articleo or" prcpsrty 
in the tin box V.elonc;;ing\t.o tnc: -ieceased: therr, '-Tas no real 
change male in tlie custody 6-^ the pr;per$y in the tin cox] 
and it is aviient, that pvcrytiiing in the tin box, -la ^eli 
as the tin box itoslf, re-rainsd uni'feT the lominion wr 1 ocn~ 



X 



trol of the ieeeased, until hi<i Jeathrr- 

To raake V valii rift c:.. U3a .Tiortia tbe cvmsr must not 

,^^^ ^ _ 

only part vith t~he poasesnion, but all :;ontrol xn i iominion 

over the pro.crty. (Earnum v P.eed, 135 111. 3GS.) The 

etj>.tc:.erit .^le by the Nieceaaed, to appellant, an i to Sarah 

I Loxinsberry, jo.'iotrning th^.p,ift, w; 3 not aoconr. -'anigd by a 

real change in his dominion or vjor.trol of the note a.iring 

hia life ti.T.e; nor id it have t\e effeot of tr^^ns* ?ri'ing 

the ownsr^hip o" ".he note iurin- hiii life. 

'\ 

In thia case, as in th.e caae of Sar^ Loiinoberry, 'he c:ift 
of the note -vas incompl^.te, bee -use it iiXnot pa^a out of 
the iominion or control of th^-^ deceaeed, in his lif ?. ti.ne; 



,^Tih 9d o* Y'^9'^sf^o»J cfjs^ J aid* sflliBue^A 
-X»crq* 9rfi Jjssi.:? fcsJbn .d-nexccqj^ si it 

to qirfsiBfiT'O tni: floisa&eabia titaiLc 

9a in Sftfilleqq^ o* 13V0 *1 .h^8««q* eviju ijix/o . .ton adit 

irre^ffl >ofl 111 »d V 

.£!;)■ ojsL ^'lolsd 
r&voenoM 

XIow . ttn^livfi ai 

' . -fot adt t^mj xod nli 

:. J lot* 

;fon jBOtt T- :' a^.tionr .ea^x;. .".v.m ol 

noXirimoi tns Xo^Jnoo XXjs xaaaaao ^iu- 

9rfT (.80£ .XII 8SX ,Jbssr; v RU/nai.S) .\r?i: j-vg 

js ^<i Ji 8 lfl£r mo 00J3 J " ilni5Cfios ,x^'i9"B^u;oiI 

;_ "cj XoidTto cttttot fcjLii ni agnjodo Xjsoi 

gaXfiw tsoc-x;)- "io *o on ;oml;l^ a^lX aid: 

, . - . , i 
.91. qidcTsowo aritf 

-uroJ 4^*ii52 lo a£o ajtrftf' nl ( 

Lozino'j 10 XToinlmol: ail* i 



/ and i-hG intention of the ionor ia clear, t'.&t ^\^ iii not 
I wish the tii;le of the note to paaa to ths lones Ui;til 

(after hia ieath* It .vas thsrcfore ^n attempt to rnj-ke a iia- 
pcwiticn of liis oroperty, to take sf-?cot after ieath, -vliiah 
id tsetair.entury in its ohar&i,oter, a-nd not valid, because 
the requirenenta of the Statute concerning ouch a iiopoai- 
tion of property are not compliei vith, 

V/e Lire of opinion that the trial court properly found 
the appellee not vuilty; :tni that :he propoations cf law 
ani fc-ct hell by the trial oourt, are not inconrd3t-:jnt 
with this .general finiingj that, therefore, no error -/aa 
committed, and ':he judgmsnt should be affirmed, 

judgment affirrrei. 



nofiii. 



11 :,...j_ij ^. 



ir:j 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, \ _ 

SECOND DISTRICT. f ^'*' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFPY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in m_y oflBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my band and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



?,/» 



I •!•>( j'^i'ol i.ifi,!; -'ioi ' 



•l -HI- (, 



6 ^'O'^' 



J .' 



J 



in 



Z^"^' 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, ^' 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the St^te of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. JOHN M, NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice. j 



CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. '"'^ ^' | "^ 



Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justicej^-^ r\^ r\ "'" !' /? ^^ ^ 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff, 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AUG 1 lyi^ the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



.':■-. bns briibrjjci sain ' 

. bv i i p,uL -^atb iasi^ , ?; UAB 3 . 

.soiJa/jL ,8aMA0 .X iltTlAUa .noH 



r; ji \'/ .1 x ,y J '3 rl i i c n o iai q o: ■ s rf i. 

: :: i w-o J ,-gnxv?oIIo' 



Appeal frurr. Peoria* 



Con. V.o. e^-5a 

Goner ^1 Acci-i^r. t Fir* i Lifa 

Aasurance Corp. LtJ.. 

Sophia Krekel, appSaiee 
Niei'.wUB, P. J. 

Tl^ie is aiixappeal-- f rom 3 judgrr-snt for :t345 cf tht; 
County Court of Feorisa /County rcoovared bytlie apprilles, 
Sophia K. Krekel, a;;^tyiikt tl:>3^.a,ppellant, C^neril Ajsilsnt Fire 
a Liie Aasurance Cpnp, L^d. ' 'Ihs clain. for vhioh the ^ulryvio'xst 
vras rendered, *S- baaed en .^n aacidsnt oollcjv i'-jsuod by the 
ai^-p^xiaaa-t to John K. Krskal, for tiis oenHifit of hia vl Ioat, 
t .-.e a^m*i4-»e, insuring hiai in th5 sum of ^-.300 a-^-iinst tna 
effects CI bodily injuriaa c-uaai iir otly, aololy :ind inde- 
pendently of ill other oauaee, by axtsrnal ^nd -jlcoI iertal 
rr.sana; excepting hcwever, suicide, vhile ai^ns or in.aans. 

John K. TCrekel, tne inaured, ';?&,s ci saloon k^sper in 
the city of Peoria, iPd liv^i vith hie facily, in *:li0 rcoms 
connected vvith _.nd aiti.ifjted in the rear cf tn.s 3L.3 ocn, :..nd 
in the iseaoni atory above it. The policy in qusation, yva.& 
ioHuad to him on ilie 34th. day of Nov saber 1914; .;.nd i'l.iueed 
him until the firiit day of Janxxary 1915. The polj cy i-rovided 
that the inaurance should be extended froir. nonth to jro'th 
alter the date nentioned, by payment of the rreiKiums lue for 
each month, on the first day o jach rr.onth, in advenes* 

On the 34th, da.y of F?.bru:iry, 1915, t'rs dsceaeed ^^-rose 
at about 5:30 in the incrning, dressed _nd .vent dovrastcj-irs, 
taking rtith him hie revolver, which iir^d b^en pl:c3i on the 
dreyeer the evening before. He descended on«. flight of 
3t&,ire, which landed him in ^ little hall containigg tnree 
iocrs, -■ one opening into his auloon, one intc the kitchen, 
-nd tae other into the dining roomf mre went into the saloon ■t' 



A 



\l 



seS9 .oVS .aBD 

• jsiios^ moil IjB«qqA av 

09l.Ieqq-s ; Cs3{9i)i jBiriqo8 

«9sxleqq*; Sifj-ycr teisvoqett \:*(tuowK.^T09^ to iii/oO '{^^rujoO 






J>„^^.*^-,V- I -;.'. "^ -«~' 



i 

sricf terrX^p,* 00£| !to asys sti* ni; ffiiri sfrliuQfli «»ihU 
-dtni Jbfi£ vXefoe ,\:Xjfo rtXJc; i>»sijfiO eeXTutfri vf.tfocf to aJoal-^e 
X«*?TSfcxoo« t-n£ XfinT^jyis ^€f tSaei/jso ttsn':: . io YXJnstAsq 

.Snjsarfi to ^a£& slirfv; »tfcloiiia tisveworf gnXd'oeoxs jenjeerci 
rfi teqesJl n'ooXsa ^ aaw ,Jba'Xi/Bni aut ^Xajfei]!? ,2 rrrfoL 

ajcvt ^noifesup cii xolloq aJT .3-x Qvods ^lod'a Lnoosa srfit ni 

l)8S£i«nx trt£ ;^I6X ladmsvoU lo x^ih .xlJi'-S e/i'r ao miri oi teuaei 

tettvot'-: YO cXoq »rfT .3XSX Y^-fiunisL lo ^jsi ifEtil 9rf:f Ltimi mtci 

riitom o:^ f{J'norr aoT^: ttHLnsix^ ad JbXuoritf ecjfljsiuenx orfcf ^JSif- 

lol ayi. sKW-taioiq Srfit lo JnsmY^q '-icf ,L9noijfnon o^xil eii& Ts^-lis 

• 90ii^vl£ ni ,xfi-aOi"c rfo^e o Yj^X iteii:'} axKt no «d;fno(n rio£9 

8i<i no X«o.cIq a8*»d iijuxi rioxriw ,X8vXov&i aixf mxrf rf^Jcw gnXijiiif 

^0 Jif^il'l eno taXnsosbl eH .siolsd gnXnsvo 9di iBsmeiL 

eoirfrf ,8l5Jfni;S.t«oo XXjad sXcftU iv nx miri taXnjaX riolrf* ,aTX-3jB 

,n»f!cti3{ 9('t oinl cro ,rTooX-;B eiif o^ni gnineqo sno^^ ,«iooI 

T //rool.ca ©rf;t o>*nX '* loooi arrinli axfJ- o*nl leriiJo en* Xn~ 



yCani from thers into the bqaemsnt, v/here "he stired up the fire 



/ — -^^ 

/ in the xurnac©. , (> 

^^hat t 



e I urn 2,0 e. 
Beth his wife ani his motherinlaw testify that they heard 
the ieoeaaed iesoending to the b.iaementi and his wife testi- 
fied' t'..ct she heard him corns out of the baseir.en't, .^nd hsis-ri 
his footatepe ab he w&lked around in the aaloon belo^ ani 
while he was in t'ie saloon, iihe heard a souffle on Vac floor,-) 
and, in connection there.vith, the' Tf?port of two gun shots in 
rapid suoceasion. T;.sn she und her mother rushed iownstaira 
they fcuni the insured lying with his body parallel v/ith 
and about two fset from the bar, hie revolver lying; about 
opposite hie hips, and niid'-ray bet'.Taen hia right hand f~nd 
his body. The bullet '.round had penetrated the left breasts 
and ancther bu! let hole was discovered on the inside cf 
the aide door leading to *: e outside cf the building, which 
thsy iiscovered ;vas oren, or partly open. A C'.iair had also 
be-^n overturned in the aalcon. The revolver containel the 
Shells of two exploded cc^-rtriigea^ ^nd sheared the inisnta'tion 
of tlie hammer upon two c'chers, which acr.aretitly hai failed to 
explode. 

A declaration was filed, declaring apecially u'^on the 
policy invplvcd in f e suit, tofjether .vith an affidavit of 
■ Jvn-iSikJlSt Or^. claim. The abstract ho'vever, ;oes not set out 
the allegations of the declaration. To this leolaration 
the appellant filed a plea of the --eneral isaue, .rith an 
affidavit of serite to the whole of ap^^driree** de;r.:;.nd, be- 
cause the insured coimitted suicides ani that the policy was 
thereby invalidated. >d^ 

There was a tria'St by jury, which resulted in a ver- 
dict; but the verdict icno\ set out in the ^-ostract. An 
examination of t .e record, n9ivever, iisolosee the fact, 
that the verdict was or the apb-^llee, ani 'hat it aasegeed 






-i^asi^ eliw eirC _fcaJ3^f;fxj©m59Jfc:cf sri;J- oi' gniijaaoeel:' fjea^sost arid- 
h?i.s. (tfoXdc aooX^s 9£(t xsi Jbmxoii; LSsHbw erf e£ aqed'&^ool aitf 

08i- . . ap ,rtfr. * aa^vooeii i£©rl;f 

nolit&&a9t. 9WQ£fa tn.. fea^tJtitf'iJSp JbeJboXqxs owJ lo jlXerie 

.9toXqx9 
9di aoqu ^XX-aJtosqe gni ic-sX oaJD t^aXil i^^w npi*JBij:iX08i: A 

'1:0 ?i:vj8X>il^js if^.d^'iiK Tsff^et^oJ ^j-Jtua s: j al isvXoyai icpiXoq 

tsfo *»s ^omo; 8 00 ,i:ovsTi?o4 .rf'o<BTE*a4s »dT .mJtwelo 4 ' ^M fc^^j ta?4^ 

flEoltfjai^Xft^fc aiif* oT .ntoi*.£■I£Xpab,e|d4:^'3:p tnoi^fSftX^JS oriJ 

it£ ^*lw ^JM/e^ X#i9ns;i ©rl:t 'lo jsaXq s bBill iaBll4^q<i^ exlj 

a^i« voiXoq sdi tmii ba& titttotuB b9ttlai:voQ S^sxuBnl a:ii. e.^i/xscf 

nA .c)d- - .+U0 i^h /oaat ,tolbt&v oA^i.tud ito.lt. 

• ■i seeoXo&iJ; ^lavsv. or! ^Jtioo.ea 9'.'':t ^o nol^fnimiixe 

li6S69es-; .+ i, ij- , I , \}js dfl:f ao'i aj8W JoXXisv ©dt Jjarf* 



the appellee' 9 da-irages at |'-345; -c-ni th2 court rsnierci oudg- 
mert fcr ouch amount, which io the juJg^nr-ent, fron; "hioh 
this ir,peal i3 proseouted. Inaamuch as tlie alleviations of 
the isolaration, rrhich «'jrs covered by th-3 general icau3, :irs 
j not 3et ou^ in the abstract, qussticria par'.alning to the 
ieouo by those ailegs-tiona ruiasd by the f^enarai iooua, 
are not beforf: ua Tor oo:ui*-ieration; nor ai'i? ':!:Gr'j u,ny 
o^uestiono pertaining to the vcriiot, in oonrieotion -ith 
the cpecia.! int rroi'-^toriee aubmittci to ths jafy, 'oy the 
appellant, before us ■''ox con^i isi'fe(.t J on; aa thr-; v.->rMiot iu 
not set Out in the abetraot. Trom '.he pl3a.iir£;e sec out in 
th5 ::.botrd-ot, it ia appacvTit hcvjevsr +'.',u.t the iirijue, -/hio^ 
was tried c»,nd eu&fiitted to the jury wji-Bj tlut ci' the dlegsd 
suicide of the insured; und it 3 b net iii.portint, ,: ich aide 
had the burden of t-roof u:on the ic?)uea ct-rccr.ted, inaBmuch 
as there ^ae no ccrrttet over the facte, ?ni jlII th-3 eviienoa 
which was aiauced in the c^se, -va-; cffercl by the j,,..t.aliee , 

The only question tc be co::?idered, ir- heth;.! the 
evidence tends to show, that thf; injur ice vhioh rere ir.i'licted 
upon the ins.ursd, &n.l from wnich he liad, wars the result of 
euicido, or wore cicciienttt.1. There is no lir^ot syihcn.ie cf 
hov,' the inesured wac ahot j ae to ^hsther hs ahot himaair with 
suicidui intent; or vhether he ^-ui, accirhsntall; ehot, parhi.pa 
in -A scui'fie with ixn. intruder into his place of buainsss, 
ie :.nd rauat necessarily be, a. sriutter of inference .'ron! -ho 
facte :i.r.d oiroui.atanced .toven. We ~re of o'^inion, th^iit the 
jury kirvire juetiiied in the oon'-iluaj on -rhioh th?:y svi.nntly 
reachsd, that the insured lid not cc.nmit 3uicidi3; at ^vny 
rate, thors ./as aufiicicnt eviienoe to justify thia 
ooncluaion ac a ro^uBor.able conclusion* 

Ay.poli4:.nt also a&eigne for error, that thsre Aias no 
proof of the notice to ^-ppellant, cf the death of tV;s inaBeei 
aa required by the terms of the policy; nor any -^rroofa of 



£.1* o^. gnini^/ioq anoi«fa©iip ,jJ-o-t;arf'Qd£ 

dLl6 iolln ^ta&t'soqml toa ^t il baa ibB-wBus. 

oonet iV9 8i{^ XXjei l>j«»: »p*OJ^i.©if^ -lovo Ja3^aoo on a^av 3i3;i" £i£ 
.©•ilsqqjs »ift> yd f^ois^^o fi£w ,«aiso srirf ni Lsoii^ijs a«ip rioixJw 

b^ioiSl^l sfltew rfoiriw a«2-uj(;aX ©4^ i^di «worifi oo aJbaau aonetlvs 

lo iXxresi ©ift sic?. ,i>slt sri ricirivr mo^l tnjs ^berjjaat jBdt aoqu 

":-j atCitelxlv* *o«TJtb na «4 8isiT .Xjsj;tnsiioo* siow %o ^obtsiua 

aq^i»«$q ^ioiia ^LlAtasbloos ti«« itd tsdtQti- - x^ioii;e 

>c6r!jC£L'cf to 90£lq f^tti ptai r^bu^iai ae dtlv »Xlluoa £ al 

""•rf.?, **ill ..neiBie©. Ic siu^ sW .nevo7r, eaon^^Siiwoiio Jttij^ a;tOje^ 

tXtisre^iva xsrftf rfoirfw.ao£ejuXono& ailJ^ fll i)»jtil^Bi;£ ©isw y^u/f; 

Yn« ^oi ;sLialjj£ Jiarcoo ;foK Jbii. Jba'jiien^ Oi.'J tsdi. ^beAosBi 

BliW t^i^sij^ 0.+ aons-iiv© indi oilli/s e<ew eicf-'it tacfiJT / 

*aola;iXoiioc< sLdAaoAjoat « 0£ noiei/Xonoo 

oa «««. sasri^ d-^IJ .10116 lol aiia^aa^ oaXx tA,eXXaq,qA 

r3»«o:.i: :- ' lo :fi*^ .0 .urt^iXaqqj- oj aoliton »4'^ Iq tooiq 



tae dea'th of the insured, ic liver el to the appellunt. It is 
suffioient to au-y on this point, that the record shows, that 
the jippeli^nt waivei lorrr.al crcox' of these ir.atters, on the 
trial; ..nl is therefore net in position to raise questions 
concerning this proof, on -ippeal. 

It ia eviient however, that the amount recover-d by 
the appellee, in t -.e judgrr'ent, - n-afcely, t^345 is in exoess 
of the amount that the appeliee had a, right to recover 'oy 
tho terni3 of the polioy; which ia iimitei to C«5'^^; unie.js 
the proof showe, that the insured maintained the polioy in 
continuoua fcros xtt~T its date, by the payment of the prem- 
iuita on the date due; in v/hich case, appellee vyouli a^so be 
entitled to recover five per cent of the |300 provided for 
in caae of death^ :-nd for each coneecutlvo sonth iriS'.ediutely 
preceding the date of ttie aooidento It 'vill be observed, 
that t.vo elefficnta -.re nsoessary to establiah the uppsiles's 
right to r°0c ver th3 five per cent, '•entioned; first, the 
maintaining of the polioy in force continuously; and secondly 
the payment of the iT.onthly premium on tns lat$ -7n3n it becarrc 
due, v?hich was the first lay of each r.onth, in advance. Thr 
insured p.id for two oonseo tivo ironths a-fter the issuance 
of tiie policy, and thereby maintained the policy in force 
continuouuly ; but he iii not niake hie payment on the dates 
vshen they vvere lue, the first payirent having been mads 
on the 7th. of January, ^nd the . jsconi payment on '-he 2nd, 
of February; both payTents Dein^y nnade after the iate, when 
they had becon-is due. Un loubtedly, the purpoee of this stip- 
ulation to pay the adIitionaL five per cent, waa to insure 
the prompt payment of Lhe premiums on tha dates they Veoame 
due. The insured not having; paid the oarr-e as required, ap- 
pellee ia not entitled to this additional five percent; but 
her right to recover was limited to the original amount of 
|300. 



f£K-t .Gfyorfs i'iooo :'^f^f ,#nloq elrf^f Co y^e o;t c^nsloxlli/a 

enol*39wp 98tjst c i.oq n.c vfon sioleTerf j- ei in;; jljeiit 

.I.';eqqj3 ao ,iooiq sxrft gninisortoo 

eSOOXr .. B^Z% ,71?^- ■ - , t i-rr -Tgi;jJ i; ©nd" at «8»XIsrrrj£ grfj 

ni xtlloq 6rft beftljs^nf ;.-r bsrnj^rri 9rf;t i'jsild' tBworfa looiq erid' 

-rff9T:q srft ^o t«6*t^t? o^fi 'ikfis ©oiol eLfoufritfnoc 

yd oaiB bli/ovf salleqq^ ,96£0 if o iff- 'b 9tci: sifif no ejiul 

TOl tsfcivoiq C505| 'W* lo #n9!j i>©Xd-i*ns 

ifc9vi99cfo e .ifrtotlc - .u gnlLeoertq 

c*9ell9qq*3 arlJ rfaiXcf-ets* ■:•■ yrtsBssosr 'aQinsXe oW* d-jarf* 

s-n.JQOsn' cfx fieilv . -J iiujjtmsaq yXdJnoai ©rft lo Jnsrax^q srfi 

trilT^ *«o^J5r^': Hi \fi&nc-^ rfc-s? "5:0 Y-sf^ei-^'t 9*^* SJ3W rfoxriw «9i;i. 

aon^xrsD' -vi; ..?,•_. .oi ';.--, iai^q'Le^iJjanl 

30to jHoq srf? bf^rttjs&tilam ^dsisriJ fcnx; tYO-^-toq ©o* lo 

©Jfcjsw rtssd gnlir^sd ;^xi©snij3q faall ori.t «oj;;t oiew Y©n;f neriw 

.i>nS erft tto tastn'^xo: ^fTooe«5: «ff# fcn,. ^^TjsiirriiL ^o .riJT srlj ao 

'jfifiilw 4©>!fjt; ©irf* '.itnsTiYJaq /liod" (y'-'^^t^^Q'^ ^o 

-qijfi eirftf 'tc ©8w ;tduoinU .eut araooacf is^ri x»^>^' 

Ar,r.-,f. f ^#«rt a-stfjBfc- fii'f rre simittifnir: Jrisufx^q d'qmoT'r ©if J 

a;;: »t": . ' rl-on Jbaiuani ^. 

L»iilin» ion el eaiXoq 
oJ- bQittnil 6JSK ^©voooi o* *riali rBd 



Tho judgment zx therefore is error.eous to the extent of the 
excess over .f500» This, however, can be cursd by en+ering 
a remittitur; an J th'e judgiriimt is affirmed at cost cf appellftg 
upon ccniition that the appeliee enter a re.-ni "^titur, rsiuc- 
ing the ficriourit of the judgment to $300, within B duyo. 
Bat if :l remittitur is not entered, ths case is to be reveraei 
anl ranr.anded* ■-' 

Affirmed, on condition of the entry of a remit- 
titur of part of ta?. ;}ui[jmant« 



Appellee having entered a romittitur reiucinp;; the arnoiint of 

Dollars 
the juigment to Three Hxindrei (;i^:30C.) /.the julgrri.jnt ia 

affirmed In the sum of $300. at the costs of appellee. 



/ 



©si 

isei&vsi a-c 07 t£ ss- 



, ':"" .'"if. 13V0 aaaoxe 



3 J liJOinx-. ill" '.^.i^.A 



■• .+ij3 



-J 



t:i 



I J, J. -■:- ^ «_ i\ 






STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. i I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFPY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing- is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and — — ^ 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



■■•'■-! ■'■'' 1" •: ■■ -rA l,rf,: .^' .niilT y. : 

.'■>-;il';() Vfvf i!> bT<'r;0'l *'i . .iiwf) ! 

■•i'j: .):.Vi;/,j(.J Jj- .;-lun') 'Atjiilrxicf/ 
; t. . -ii:-,-/ ..,f|,J :M_ . 



I- 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT ^ 






Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of tbfe State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justi/e. 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice^, 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Cle^rk. "" ^^' ^ i-o/l« 4 |^ 

/ 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. / 

/ 

./ ^— 



T 

i 

/ 



\ 

\ 


/ 
/ 


\^' 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

Alir 1 ^ i4''' ^^^ opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following-, to-wit: 



^ .— , t. 



:. r^'-ygrji: ,j.]aaia sotiAr^^ 



i c : 



1 l:r-s ob^cw 



^0 aoin-qo erit 
■J ni .iiiroO bijBS 



jiiiivi! 



Ctn. ITo. 6354 

Tae People of the St;^.le of Illinois 

ex rel. ^\ appellee. 

Vb Appeal froff. Knox* 

Frci Cutl*ir, i-poallant* 

Ni'^liaus, P. J. 

Thi^-; ly an appe-;,l trcn a juigrrr.nl of t.hs C'jirity Court 
01 'Snox Joui-ity oonviotin;;; tl.e appellant, Fr.-^d Cutle:?, of 
bast'-riy on -.hi: cciBple-int r.^^is "oy tlic .'.roiocufci^i;;^ v;ituejs, 
Icelcon I'ilson, 

T':'2 only evi "ebce offsrsd by tlia crosscut i en to sus- 
tain the shtTge 1b the testiir.ony of Mie ocrr.plainant , ani her 
te3tiir.cny cox'.i.l ttti; n;ci-cly cf the ax-s st-;.terr.ent, that s";.e t^ a-- 
an unrrx-.rri^d \>'or:ian, ^hf. n.othcr cf ^^.G child in Qvesticn; 
ccupled with ar asjser Mon, tLs-t ahe had intercourse ;*lth 
appellant^ •.-.nd, that he i-fr Ihe f^^thsr cf her child, No 
circiHTiti.-'.-ncee .i.re r:;-i&.ted, that in any v.^ry corrobor:--te the 
complaining witneys in thejc statcn-.ente; ahe loes not otate 
v/hen t)ie a.ppeilcuit had int.ir course v/itli hor, nor '-'here, nor 
under '/.■hut oirciisnstancGs; nor v;hei;her there v'as one r.ct 
of intercourse, or score. The oriinary incidents of '-iioe, 
and place, v/nich a,r(? indiapsnsible co^msoted with ':.he i~.&in 
ftiot to be ;roverj and jre usuiilly r;,f;;ari©d as nscaasary 
elfe'.r.snta in fully estcblisging the fact of paternity, ars 
entii-ely oa.ittad frorr, her t-=stimcny. 

The oare aes&rticna of th.2 oomcliiins-nt, that ao reliant 
hiid intcrco\jrae "vith hsr, and v/a3 the ft.thev of her child 
were n.et, not only by ths fla.t Isniil of the appellant, 
that he had o.ny intercouroe with the conplainin?: vitnossj and 
tha,t he Wrid the fathsr of horchild; but also by. other c-viiBcs 
a-dducsd on the part o.:.'the ief ;n.iant, which T,ilit>.^tr;.'. atronr;ly 
against thcs charge of paternity, as r.:tie against appal lant. 



,ciir -■ cm; 

J^oO Y-'T^oO 9ri<t "io tn?:3fghisl '. , .. 

lo .tcoI^J-iiO bsu"? ,^n-6XXsq-._ rl.friv ,. ... .^ ..... _^ 

t.-,.---i~ ar.-^XaoI 
-eifs ol ccxjjjoseotq sxfd- yicf &g'£Sl:'io. sofifaXlvs ^fno ©rfT 

Yirti tii.s ^d'ftJBfiijsXqaioCi ©rft 1.o <caoitil*8©* srfj al d^rsdo ari'J- nl^t 

■> -.^ 
ol'i: ,x)Iiiio isri lo ^e -fShi erf tsi: 4 i-- '"I-s 

9ci.l- e;tjsiG<foiioo y-^'^'^ Y^- - ♦i^Q^'-aX'^i 0:t^3 aaonjscferafoiio 

10x1 ,»tei:fy; T0« ,torf rfcfif? 9b-X5./o: - ^li L^,rf Ja^XXaqq^ ei^+ fisrfw 
;^!^J* si^o o£V;- sirsii.' ■•':'' r •jison.3d'3fauoiic|.. d".i?itv, iscctu 

fflixs-i Sif:' Ailii i^e^cr -: ■ .5.;; ^ roX,v.n5r;i ;r r;l o-i- .:>;.• >Xr: Htm 

9:1^; »-iJ-ln^f?d^£q lo ito^s^, 5 ,, : ■t.lXJ-.'.iaa ^^-i^J^^ '^i: aitnaiTi^Xe 

. -'iflo-fii; ;t .. ..lOTi''^ t sd-^jtaio ^ ^Isi i: j no 

iXi.'fo 'xcri 'o •r5ilg\-'3 , ..ted sLii* ©artuooTto^ni fcjsd 

«tf£tj8li 9 ■::•;£ 9x1 J lo X«ifl©JL JisXl Sff^ ^cf ^^^o "^ -;n »;t9.ii eisw 

if/jT I seen;? it/ ?saJtnij:.Xqinoo orf* rfcl"XTf ©B-xuootcs^nX yn..'. i;jjri bA i&iii 

90i3u.tv-; TOil;fo.'?tf OB £« tu<S xhLlixxjfjii ^c isrlJ-al st^;'- a:;vv 9i( *^iii- 



^ 



Mies.Cl&ra Sna p, testified, that iho cereral repu- 
tation 01" ':1-? ccmpl^-inlnfj; 'vit.rieco io LaJ. in L^c con;.rvinity 
\"cere .^lie lives; ani th&t frcrr that rsputitic-i) slit kouI:'. not 
bellcvj lit'-i unier c^.th. Thic ■•'itnsas Vi-lec t >ttif icd, '/nc;.t 
'.vhii-. ihe re:, ombe-red but one pRrr.cn by n-nc, '.vbc /iai 
iis3U36ea •,h3 rsput'-tion of fne ooiEolsilnlnrr \7i t - ■> a a ; . 
aivs c' so r vsn^uC-reJ. o^^h^r feopls tai:!j:iag a'oou"; \'\<i 'attsr, 
wboae nar e,:, 3-;2 cculi t'Ct f^oall at that tirr^i. 

Mrs. Lucy Suut'i t^9til'i?;i, that the corip.c.iring viiness 
'.vhilc prCj^jrij^nt ".vith. the ohili in cuestioii, -10;. i ■•or c 'jceueated 
OGcasicDfc*, t:.at ens Cl-U'l* K'^ffer 'vr^a t .:o I'uth^r uf -i-'iy :^hill. 

An I the l"'rc.thc-r of tr.f iippsll r.nt, Fwaist Cutlcir, t.??ti-':'ied 
thut on vatic UD ccc&r.icnn, :ir; 5 luring, the tiir.-s vr.-in oo'^oap- 
tion niusit haVi tc-':on plf.oe, he had '^sxucii intsrcoariff ■ ith the 
complvi-inunt . 

All Ihi:-} rvii-ntj-s in in atrcnr; contrcidiotion of ths 
gsneral btat-srient of tli5 cornplalniric^ witr.eaB* th?.vt the :-,ppel- 
l<A.i;t iij the :^'ztLer cT \^t child; -.inj goec ^.s '^^eli tc irnooaoh 
hor credihility. 

In c. o-.fo c." thlo kindj it is gnouinbant on K,e ."roff^GU- 
tion to C£t:^blitj>i ihs oharje of bastxriy by rh'^ ',velr;hl of 
thu evizrnciev Mi'ttfs v ?'■>?; Pscple 3tc« ixi<. I.ll, A.'p. ".". 
[_ The- v.'C-ight cf ^hp fvl 'nnue ir: tLis oiise, b-jvcviar, olearjy 
\ vfavored the appellant. A v~.T5iot in :\ buatariy oa^^e, '.hat ig 
against th.s "/eight cc theeviclsnoe, ahouiji ">:^ •, .:;t aUie. 
ILcQoY V the P©opl'5 eto. 65 111. 441. 

Ths lingucge of the supr';;,^; court in ::he o:-;--e c: Jones 
V Tae People etc. F>5 Til. SoG, acpiiey .rith. peculi:-.!' aptness 
to th- 03.38 at har: "la t,hia C2,3G the put -t 1/6 rather tes- 
tifies, he never ^vad ejnyucil int';rocur.;.3 '7i';h t'lm ocnriainant; 
ani, thit he j3 net the f^.thar c_ -criC child; other ritr.eeBes 
who ure not impea'^hed, 3.nd s'^.'im to dc of unviti^jntisonsi orei- 
ibility, testify to facts contradictory ;;o tboae stated by her; 



fi-'l' »iSiliifca?t' Ocsije aseaJiv sifiT .ifitjso -latiiij iari &V5_iXec' 






;3 '^oJuJ 



. w-L'JO 



9rf^ dti 



•tejnx i.i>iyxss j^jbh sri 












xaass 



^i J. v^xiiti'iU li ' 






J Mijai*-^-* 






■ 11; ^^ik/c 



SB£0 



.ecxj.!; 



-v: 31^ 0X1;. 



ani, while she is net corroborated in r^ny impo tant partiular 
by any ,7itnsJ0, ^'S tliink tho vor.liot should aaV3 b-rsn Ccr 
t\M -isf c-ndant. Th3 oaao ^liould ^o to anothar jury, .-n;i tha-t 
it r.ay, Miia judgrnant io ravsrssd and the cauae r-rrati Jed." 
'^ R3vera3d aud rerrianaea. 



/ 









♦^9i 



^^^IL^^i^i'n.oJ''^^ 1- L CHKXS.OPHEK C. DHPKY, Clerk of the Appellate 
Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

^ay of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 






^ ' ■ : -V::!' 'i- M,! ■■!;■' .(. ;l,f 7- 



1 ,<^' 



i'U: !:yj •l).\i:> 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the/State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding" Justice. 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justices' 

I 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justicf. 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. ,^^, -^ ^J _i,i-l« Re '/ 

E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff, | 



/ 



/ 



/ 



/ 



~g^' 



/ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AUG 1 ^ 1916 the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ares 

following-, to-wit; 



ill! ic etfc £!il:' J.C .;-oii^::iG onOGiij 
.^oilaLrO .jj:?3ia ? 



.'. 1 ■- i •-■■ 



•uoo o.if ': 



rBWi 3 i'x^ ' Sri + J as.' 
;; , T'cijoO bias \o 



Gen. No. 6356 ' 

Michael J, Ryan appellee 

v8 Appeal irorri Stark. 

John T-. IIcLTty, aypeii-int* 

Nishaus, P. J, 

Thlo TTTig ^ »ait|.ot:on cf asaiampait, (>^--MB*i*«*d by l^ichael 
J, Ryan, t rio tAj i f oiaoc , in-tfe^-e-lrE^^Hr— -o^ar t of SlAi ' k gumi l - y^ 

,4, Us -.-/a -tr 



aguir.Gt Joiin E, H^rty, Ut a a o pg-jr itrrrtr. The lecl-ration 

A 

in tiie o:xBe con.^iatB of ;ne co.r.trion counts to vliijh the appel- 

li^nt filed tue ;2.anerul ij^ue. The ac;;e lee aet xorth In hia 

bill of purticulara, filed with the doclaration, t;-.:-t [he 

appellant owsi him .•■1106| /liis inlebtelnssa ^ comcoaei of two 

items, UL-mely, ^906, .vhich w J4iall 5r '^cla.imed tae father of 

cJuJc----v_^^.--- ^A. c^h -'■■ --i- *- >- ■-^- 

a;i, elia3 »t- owed him, and /hich ap»p.el-iant had aae\;in:ed, ar.d 

also an IteiT, of ^^'^'C' cash loaned to t-ie » -roaIli *nt t -att^i ssfr* 

• cCl - c -e teetified t at aH-^-^^^iitwit executed a ^romijisorv note 

for t e sum of s.1106 pi^yabie to ^r-pe^itre, but retained it 



u'ith the conaant of a .. :.'Qll e e « A.::'Qll ii. n - t > iid net 



ieny the as- 



3uraption of 'he ^906 iniebteliiese, nor the C^OC item, for 
monsy loaned him oy the . mp: oil&e j but denied^' that he ever 
executed ., note for the, san:e, and claiirec^ t'nat he had paid 

both i tenia to a r.i9 .loc. 

-1 

There -.vas a t ial by jury, .,ni a ver ' ot Tor a;pe.Ilee, ',nd 

his dairages nsre atiascised at llZQO. Aft.r overruling a motion 
for a ne ,v triu.1, ;i._ ie by appelant, t,:?, oourt ron.iered 
^uignr.ent on ' -le vsriictj frott hich julgn-.ent this a ;. eal 
ia riroaeoutei. 

There is praotioai.y but one question r .isel on thio 
appeal. It i« contended by the apoeljant, that the appellee 
was bound to -rove his cage by a preponderance cf the evi- 
dence; ani that there is no such preponierance; tliat ocn- 
cerning the transactions out of which the claim of the 



*itMd mo I:! I^eqqA 



, i i ij '..i ■- ii 



•■ '"?*:;/>-■ -j5,'^,..',,!.,.»..V~-Jr> 
-i9qg£ snj rfo.Mw od" aijrtwpo notRwoo 9xf;t lo ateianoo sejiio srij^ ni 

OwJ lo JbaeOv'jmoo i^ aasnI-std'stXTi aii/i iQOXXili miff isewo i^nxjllaqq^ 
crT£ jtiSiuyssfi i>i3ri ;}ifl:-i?i-X-aiTCrtfi doid\f tn£ »mijrf Lowo ■4« jC!XIs" ' -'js ; 

?i t9nt£.iei *i/d , 3fe£- .&s4<?« o* ©Icfi-^jsq 80XXf lo ontfe e ' io1 

-3£ sdt Yrtst ;J-on i;xc: -^-^i^&^-^r^A. * aM»^-i'«i«-^ lo Jjtreenoo sal- rfjiv/ 

lot ^moil OOS^) srf.t ton ^aeenisj-cfafcjajt 806^ 8rf:f lo noxJ-qniue 

T9V© Off ^BVj y^BtaBb iud gs-ft.j i - i 'O Vj. ^ erf* >ja' miff fceni^oX \£3noffl 

tn ,35llo; £ tol ;*•.•:? nov js fca^ t'^iiJC ^cf XjlX J- ii 8£w ©isriT 

noi*ow £ 3niiyx^9V0 'tt£':flA .QOOI4 i& Jtssaseajs qisw eegjsrniiX eid 

toislnzx t-iuoo Siij «d-nifil Loqq* x<^ Qt-^^s^ tXaiiJ wen Jt toI 

Ijcs.: ^ sxriv^ ;tn£>.-i-j5i u't, rfoxrlY moil ;d-olXisv s ; ' no rfns.Tigiut 

,LQtUOBBOTq el 

; " ao t»»Z-.z iXQxioosjp sao Jucf ^XI>£oi;tox;aq ai sietfT 

r.~ :.-'-£ 9/fj #A;;.t ^Jn*;: :£>',q& ea'cf ycf bsfcnoJnoC' ax ;M .Xjseqqjs 

-lV9 eil^ lo sonjBTstnoqe'rq s ^cf »ejt;o oiri svoic; oi bmio6 a£w 

-lor. : ^ ;oonjei&inoqe': sisdt &jadi ttis leonsX 



aprellee arose, .i-oa u on .hich the apo3llant'3 isfense is 
bc.aed, tliere ..vc but two :'. tnessee, — nvtr.aly , the ^crjellae 
on the one oiie, -,ni the appel-ont on the other; tliat arrellee 
in ^ust-ining his cu.se, teatifiei to the existence of luots 
Gonati'utirif; hio 03.se, :^n.l there io a lir-ct ienial of theas 
facta by the appellant; :,ni ^-hat hence, this leaves acp'-.j lee ' ts 
case without a preponderance of 3Vi ! nee to gut rt it. 

TThile it iu true, t.at the statertents m ie by these -artiee 
I respectivily, jonoernins the -citterB in i^^-ue bet-e-^n ♦•-hem, 
..re iiametrioally oppo^^ite, tV.er'^ wer^ i'actis n .1 circum-'ta ncsa 

^ teatiiTied to by other itnoasee, >/iiich ap-.r^rently contraiictei 

the ;:u.rties rr.apectively, in gome parts §1 their teotirrony; 
there .vus aiso some svid-^nce .vhioh may be conciiered iS 
. corrobative of breir teatimcny in r.onie oarticulato. 
^1 But the number u.C Adtnesses who trSitify in a oaee, ia 

I no- r.ejeaearily ieoisive c.f !.he question of -rsponderance. 
_• /If there ..re bat twO adtneBses, .-^nd t;.5y tcytify diametrically 
oppoiiite, oonoerning rnattars .ithin their personal Icnc/ledoe 



< 



C 



thiii ioes not necessarily rei*ult in a lack of prspondr. ranee 
concerning the ;attere; the queetion of prepond^r.ince is 
largely ^ question of the oreiibiiity of the r.itnsoiseQ vlic 
^testify; a.nd --- question for the jury. The jury arc 'he 
proper judges to determine ..iiicti ^itneaeoa -.^-e more credible, 
or .vhich of the parties to a law 3Uit is telling the truth. 
(Shaw V The People 81 111, 150; Boylaton v Bain, SO 111. 
383; Johnaon v The P <j)le 40 fl)il . Ar-p. o83; affirrrrd in 140 
111. 350.) 

It is liotinctly empaaaized in Eoylston v Tain, supra 
that '.vhen ; fact eBsen + ial to a r:;Oovery, ir- scwrn to by one 
witneaa, and lenisd by another, of apparently equal credibility 
it ioea not i^ecesaarily follow, that there ia no prsponderanos 
of eviience; but in that case, there is a conflict of evidence 



I 



sdllsj;^ 9ii« « xie«*^ii — ,8985--^'- -^ o*':»- :tud 3-].^ eiarijf ^Laajscf 
99iXs7.iv2 *;Bifvf jiSfi^p eii4 flO ^|ii --.. -- — «oi:iu eno s.:. no 

aaoQ^ I0 X«iiiGi .to.-'xH. is si ^tsrfi- In.: «sajeo aid gnl*jjvtl:tenoo 
a'esXrpqqjs aev^^si aldi -,':••■ o*)i-* in/j {^rtJsXIsqo-e ahi ^o' ad-o^l: 
,il ;fij qjja oi- aoi: -^ -. -o 80£T,eT9Lnbq9.ig £. JuoriJiw aa*o 
asiitivs; e^ 5ffjf Ycf Steffi a*asineJ-:.f.^ s-ri ijs:.'! ,exxnd- ei i-i eXlrf^' 

eson Bi'ion/oai'j Xn;. tsios"! siew sTed* «»4'X30qqo ^J^^ -'"'^ ^- '"^-^i' ^t 
fcs^olfc^ti-noo YX*n»Ti:>:..qjs iloixr.. ,e8aasn*Xv nsrirfo y- - ~_^ -Jc::j- __ 
;Ya<w«li'Q*v+ xisiU 1% atijsq siaoe fli ,^X9vJt*o9q89i aei^fa^q ©ri* 
•i, tsisXianoo sd xi-B"^ rfr in., »6fcftLiV3 amoe oaXje ejsw aaeriit 
.BtJBX«ol#^J3q flffic- .-- \,-iomXrf6io? aXsrf^ lo svli^-.d^i'-or 
al «9ex;o a ai ^li^as^t Off* ssisfciT.^r. 'u tacfmjt/n _. 
.tontJBaeiifTQqsiq \o fiO'ir-tfr ;t x;XlTi=;.^>B-' ; 1 

XXXjsoin^J'amjBlI ^Irii-QSi- ^(. , , . ... . ,t :^ucf si. 

eoaaioXecoqsnvj lo jfojsi . ..- . .^ . . 1 ^i.ia__,:. oan ;ton asot eiil;t 1 \ 
ax eo.aateXfxtoq^i "'o noi&ti^up srfj ^a^e^^^jsn: srf* giiinasofloo { 

■ ■ . -. ' 

3rf+ 013 xiJt/t arfT »^^wt ®d^ •Jol aoitfaaup i^lii-asif 

»»idLL9To *to3i 9-r>: eeayan^lw riotriw Balxteiel oJ asjytut icsqoiq \ 
,dtj-.& ^Ji ■sniiiei Bx ifiue ^&L --. o:^ ^alJTjBq erf.-t lo ffoXxfv; 10 

.Xil 02 ,ni^.a V noiJeXxoa (Oc-x X8 eXqo9*5 srfT v W£rf3) 

:'M ni iiTrril^fe jij3^ .qqA .XXfll Ok sl^x; =" n^'Tv noQOdoL ;£8£ 

Loss .XXI 

■■- Xj;--s vi':'.,-T ■ , lo ,aeri.to;:. .:. _ ... ^oesn^ir? 

"^T"' ':• ,■.'..;•; .rr : 7 ■- riai.-aeaoBu ;toflf asoi ;tX 



which it iB tae peculiar privinoo of ths jury to settle; 
ani it iB for the jury to Jetermine ^vhere the weight of th--- 
evidence lies, under those circuratanosaj and ^urvinj^ ioter- 
minei tliS queotion, courts of rsvie-.T ahould not disturb 
I their verii-t. In this or.se, the jury, who aa^.v the witnesses 
/ and heard ■hem testify, were in the best position to 'eter- 
Tmine 7/here the truth lay; and this court cannot say that tbs 
1 jury were wrong in ths conclusion which they formed. 

It is Liiao urged by anpeUant, that inasmuch as the v-sriict 
was Tor ^^1000 and the appellee's claim st.s for fll06, it ie 
apparently a iio-called oom.romise veriict, md the oourt 
should h:ive set it aside for that reason. We ::-re of '-he 
opinion that the appellant is not in position to object to 
the veriict, bacauae it is not for ?.b much aa the appellse 
claimed; and that there ■■/as no error in refusing to set aaile 
the verdict, fcr t'.at rsason. 

The record ioea not iisclose any legal groun i "or r-iversing 
the judgment in this case; i.nd it should therefore be affirmed. 

Judgment affirmed. 



< 



-Te»9)^ ^jytlv.'id Jb«tj2 iasortJ8*at«#s«lo »©otf* leLnu tetsll acfrsJtivs 



©••••flf^iw~ srfa' ««s orfw tX'3fJJ& ®^ 

•bemTO 1 tat^*^ Aot^ ate ' • ' -: - ■: 

JIUOO 9ilt fc^i'- ,*©i£>'rSlV S«X:!!Ui ..:JV 

•rft lo e-xs Si? .noajssi ujBf!.'^ - 



8 13? Ill .*oibw'al0ri:f 



! \ 









1..?. . -.■.,'— O.- --i >^AJ' II JliiOqjB 

' -*• - •* '' -/: jJbsmliilo 



1^ 



•tsffliillfi Jiraasstx/T, 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. f ^^" I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oflBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my band and aflBx the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



hrr .,:;ni,>:' f it -i 






',.'. :j: 



S (o/ 

AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 'V^ ^ 

'^^-, ...--^ 

Begrun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. JOHN M, NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice./ 

/ 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justicei 



CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk.r>' - 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. | 



-- V i^ jL c* ^Tj- 4. 



I 






BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AUG 1 iy't> ^j^g opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following-, to-wit: 






'-"^ c-di lo noinjqo erfi ' . ■' 

: j iw-0 J f-^atvc 



Gon, no, 6277. 

Robbs Express Conrpri.ny, 

Appelloe, 
-VB- Appeal fron County Goui-': 

of Reel: Island CorLitv,-« 
IJickolas Ferkel, 

Appellant. 

Hiehaus, P. J. 

2h,G appollGO, P.o'blDS Iscpress Conmny, coni^nenr;od SMit in 
assTirjjJsit in tho coiTiitr/ coTn''t oi' Hock Island ^ountj againr/u t}ac 
appellant, lIickola-3 Porkol, to rscovor ;)65^:.00 r/hicli it is 
clairtied is duo from tlio ap;oollo-nt on :::.ccoiint of colloctiono ri..v'.o 
by hln for appolleo, SIio docl -ration filed hj tlie appellco con- 
sisted of t}iG corn on coiuits, one. B3i itoriizod stat meit of tJio ac- 
count sued on is attacliod t-ioreto sJ?.0T7in'-: tlio tots-l araoruit of 
collections of $634.82 clalmod, 

So this docl-'Tation tlio appoUant first filed a 'lea in the 
natui^e of a plea in aloat orient, wlxich the appellant verified by 
affidavit, ^i'liis plea avers that tlie demands in tlio declaration 
arose out of part:iorsliip transactions; tliat tlie appellant, and 
one Edward A, LG-wis, .ictin;.: and. doin^ business by the nar.ie a-.-ii 
style of "■-obbs Express Compp-ny, and in its helialf , entered into a 
verbal a-rreement ".Titli tlie apoel'ltint to conduct the l:^>:■Gij^GS^• of 
hauling frei{i;ht to and from the several railroad depots in the 
city of ?.och Island, and that the co'i.lcctions r.u e "bj him -\7o e for 
haulin^^ done 'uner the terns of this ■:' rtic Irr r-ree;"nont, and thct 
Lewis also made collections uii'er this a.^reenoiit for T/i.iich ho h'.;c" 
never accounted to the c^ppellajit , and that Lewis Iiad f;.\'.led' a:id ' 
refused to ns2ce such a.Gcoir:atin,r;, and t]iat the rights and obli3a;:ion:: 
of the parties r/ith reference to the rn,;-'- t'ers alleged in tlio 






.VY29 .0:^ .rtoO 






,iR3ll5^i. 



«j'.,- -, :£i±:X-3 ■^'■.c::jo^-^ M-oIal jLoo.H 5:o i^xsiQo ^J'm/oo exiu ii± d-iao-Tiraaa 
0.'. licol-joolloo y.C' >'ritrooo.:. ifO ^rialL :1 Bocixslo 

"io jrjjofjc Iso^os' &;-•:? tj^isi-vroite oiers&r'i MiSlo.^iii al no Jjoitb d"iirroo 

«Bo!:7i;l0 SS.^i; ■ ::oUo9lIoo 

- joj' r,-.;'.^ ni a-':£'.,er:r&.^^ errj ^Jarf^t siers seJCq; &.i.... ... ■. -^xj 

• ,:?xii3XIorr(i/?. ej;,-^ irifft jar>-'^ ■■■■■: ■ -•" rijiBior. ■*•■"■ '" ^ ■':-•■ 

"' ■•■ ' V ::c:;. r . ottcoI;; ' u.:/:cr -e'-iu; jlioo ©'"— • --" ■ slwsJ 

.' ": ■:.:. u't;;., v ,: •• ^. ,■ ^ :r: :^ -- ^ ,.j.^ levon 



IX«J 5' 



■■".f 



•-tsq; 



eel£>ration could only iio ascGrtalrlod lo'j c ccnrrt; ox oqrdty, 

The appGllanu,hy leave o:C cotirt, aitorwards ■s7itliaj:'ov; is 
plea in aT3atci:ient aiid fled olio ;::one:-:'al 3.3 rmo, ana a no tic • oi: oot- 
ofx, wliicli v/UB al'ter^vards aniendod. In tiio a endod noti o o.C Bet~iSff 
tlie appGllont ad'dts tlio eolloction of tlio /;6M-»S2 sot out in ■jIio 
account attacliod to th.G clocl: ration "but avers tliat "by virtue oi' tlio 
verbal aj'prooraont entered into laj h.iBi '7ltli Iho I':o'bbs 'Bxpross Com:rX-.njr 
he is entitled to ono-half of tlio ariiomit coi;ioctGd end that ho is 
also- entitled to ono-half of certain collections 'ado 1)7 the 
BsTpress comixiny for lia'iling certain weaves anO. noj;cnandiDO fron froi ■.•!:. t 
depots end TTarohouGos to and frora the ::voelr Islanc Arsenal, and t'lat 
un or t is verbal contract colloctiono r.ade in conj:ormity tliorouitii 
by the Exj?3.-oas con-pcm^ it ic indebted to :::ln in the 8uin of iy2;:,46, 

ITIiore v/as a trir.l by jury a d at tlio concluoion of all olic 
evidence in tlie case the court, on notion of appollo , directed the 
jury to return a vordict for tlio e..,>:nollo:v i?nd assci^s its ^x}I^c.^or^ at 
0634,82, T;]iich VAiS accordiix'^.ly done, She appellant thereupon ma^'^c 
a motion to pot aside the vordict n,nd for a nor; trial, which riotion 
was ovorruled,and the court t:!io;.oupon entered jud norit in f-vor of 
the appellee for the anoimt found in the verdict, from \7.ioh JvAf^ ent 
this appeal is prosecuted. 

The principal error assigned , and one wliich enbracos all the 
qu^iStions for dote 3:T!iinat ion on t ic appeal, is that the -court orrod 
in directing th.o vordict, and ta. t the court should ha o nub)iittod to 
t'lO jury the qtiostion as to trhe thor or iiot the apj)ollan' had a verhi.l 
contract ■^vith the ;hmollGo, as clainod in th:- plea '.inj:!-:. 









■'■ r:\i r. OQ^ 



anoxJosIIoo ■••'— CaX.:. 



U> ji^.- G 



i.CO I 



'>iTO 






It appears from tlie eyiceiiee tli--^. t rlie api-)olleo is ::■- eorpOiafciO' 
engaged in tlio gonacl ozpress Dusinosr; in the cit^r oi' :-■;■, •';"■: Islcii'', 
and th?,t tlie apoelj.antis a teamster owninr; 021 e^cpress wap^on p„u1 
team and doinj; tlie v;ork of a teamster. It is adinittod tlirt on J:ily 
1, 1910, the rrooollant entered into a ?/riti;en contract vdth vv;ei:ioo 
as a tcejpster ooiacoriiLn^ the lianling -.?;iich the appolloe nia'ht havo 
to do in the co"iii'se of its husinesB to and iron the gOTerr.rnont 
arsenal v;hich is located near the city of Hod: Island. ^.l-.xc con- 
tract is as f;;llov;S:~ 

'^ " Jtay 1, 1910. 
" AC-RBEJ-Sira entered into this day hotiveen P-olahs Hr^oress Conipanj 
and ITiek Ferkol, T7he:;e'by the PvODD'^g Bsrpross Conpany h.r,Yo agreed to 
employ Hick i'^erkol as teamster on tio basis of !i^7enty-one Dollars 
pe r xtqq'k, he to furnish hie; am tGa-n and ir>rnes3 aii/iL iv. is under- 
stood ho is to do vfmt '■aiiling no have to and from tho iLOck Island 
Arsenal exclusively. VZiiere it is imposriblo to do the "Rro-rh "iiai 
one team v/o v/ill fui-nish via help on "ays viien shipinents are too 
heavy. Kiis conti>act to r;o into effect July 1,1910, and run until 
July 1, 1911, 



Accepted 

IJicIr Perlcel. ' 



Signed P.o'bhs' R3tpre3s Co, 

Per F, "■;. DafOG, Sec'--, 



^ ^rd^..^ 



vr.i'itten contract ;elatck^onJ.y to 
tlie liauling T7hich t' . J^^^^T^^ contr ctod to do for t'lo Sovorn- 
raent, of Govornaent ownod .materials and 8upi:lios, and « j _ ellaiit 
"??— — - — — -.^ho.t on tho day on T;>iich this w-ritton agree:. lent -/as eno;a'ed 
into, and before its fin^^l e3:Gcution, he na" o a vorha-l additional 
and distinct agree -ent with E, IP, Lowis, the ; rosident of the 
Express cor.ipany, eoncomin';; other th:?n. CiOVGrinent otnicd stuff to bo '.. 



hauled to wid fron tjie arsenal by hin, fo. blio .Lisrrjrcss conpan 



iy 



-^-•-i^^^ o-ir^1^ 



^ 



^>^ 



■iic 



-4^ 



Uir J. 0119 1 ~i^0 Q IIl 



. or.- 'Xr .1;^. 
-■***- X-l^'—r-*. ■. . .-A >j i .»r '■■ ■.i"3 






C^ 



, octal 






1^ verbal a'^oenent related 
-- raw natorial, ste 



!tuf 



J?J7 1.1^ 



the stuff r; 
"raw material tl 
aiicL stuff that wojiJ 
vrould t 



:m a^eoner 




overirien ■.. ^>-r — ' .i^oi 

5i;uxl uij :ja;7S'' i? 
■)Ot;v;een the tv70 of i."..:;" — - 
0:1 different shippers and f ctories, 
on t'lo CJoverniTient as rejected and 'jo 

'ejected stuff; those shiiK)ers 



ind 



irx^i.iTs 



at in his .jiid£;rient the v;ritton con- 



tract was si2;ned after the verbal miderstanding Mentioned, '-'^^ 



Concerning the hailing which ho appellant /as Lo do under 
the terns of trio writ en contract the ccntx-act itself v/ould be the 
"best evidence, aaid its tor is in t'lat regard could not be varied or 
chajiged by verbal :tosti:iony or sonvorsation. It i3 •./ell settled 
that a written contract unf-'-nbi^giioura in it:/ terns cannot be varied, 
eontradictod r nodifiod bj," parol evidence of aio^rthing that oecujr'red 
at or prior to the tine r.^en such written contr.act w.as Grreeuted, 
(Schneider v Sulzer, 212 111. 87) 

The ter;':S of the -.'rit en contract did not Unit t':e hauling 
to be done by appellant to govorirneiit owned naterials and supplies 
but inclu ed all the Ixa tiling the :i5cpress company had to do to and 
fron t"ie RocIj Island Arsenal osrclusively. 

The appellant's alleged verbal a :reeme]it cannot be considered 
a? having the effect of nodif!^'-ing or c^ianging the terms 01 the 
writt n instrunont in qualff^rtg and Uniting the anount or 3:ind of 
hauling -hich was to be done tmdor itn? terns to and : rom the r^rs.^nal; 
and inasnuch as it clearly ap^xsars that t]iis alleged verbal rgroenont 
or understanding was contemporaneous with the naldLng of t.ie 

v;ritton contra.ct and before its fina,l o:':ccTition, Biicli ver'i'l agveonont 



.A- 




^ 



'.aiil iss6 
oil 



^ 



Ncfteii^U^ 



■would "be consirierod, o,s a mat tor of lav/, as nerved in tho v/ritton 
instrn-^ent . As the nrapx-erie eoiirt annoiricod in Grul)';:- v Ilili.iii, 
S46' 111, 463, " A written contract T^as entered into oetv7oeii tlie 
;'-.arties in \7McIi tliey set doi7n v:Iiat liad iDecn agreed upon "betw-Gen t'iioin. 
In an action on flie contract it is prosmiiod to iiavo container the 
whole of the a:reenent and the various conYereations relating- to 
the r.nh .lect matter TJere mer'red in the t/rittcn eontr'.ct," 2hiG is 
the well settled doctrine of lav; in this state. ( Grahan v Sairiier, 
165 111. 95; 'j^oYm oi I'iino v Parrelly, 192 id. 5E1; ^ellurlde Power 
and '-i?ransriission Co, v Crane Co., EOS id. 214; ociiiiolder t Oiilsor, 



sup: 



•.n ^ 



TThile it ap ears entirely inprohalDlc that the appellant 
woiild enter into a verhal imd erst and in^^; <;onceminr: the hauling 
of rierohandise and natorial , with the appelle :, diffL'sent from 
the written contraci? in regard to the narao no.tter and iindor con~ 
si deration at the •■ar'e time, yet assiimng that t' e conver oat ions 
testified to hy the appellant \7ith Lewis, the president of the 
Express company, ddd actually occur, they must ho eonside: od as 
merged and included Jna the written contract; nor c-.in they ho con- 
sidered as in any way varying; t;ie terras or legal effect of such 
written contract. The only contract, thc-rcr'^ore:,^ t:_\at cJould 
he considered as hearing upon tlio issixes in t"iis caco w; c the '.rrit- 
ten contract. She court properly held tliat the alle^'od verbal 
agree' lent did not sixstain appellant's clain of set-off, and that 
ho haa. not established any lor:al rih.t or clrln to tho -.aone^T- col- 
lected; hrvins' admit ^3d that he collected the ar.ount stated in 
appellee's dodjlaration and account, the court ;riroporly directed a 
verdict for this amount. 

Gihe judgnont should ho affirraed. 

Affirmed. 






'..0 &I01', 
jiioo ii'--. xOij'd'.Gfii d'or / 



"0 axij; :!.': 






■cron 



:o.:> r.b^ 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. i" ^^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFPY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing- is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oflBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this _ 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and — 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



i ,a 



)': ■ ' j-i'x ■_ .■••"■ :>i : ;;,i'.f r'A 
■■■■ ' . -y ■- ■■■\ • ,-:,i;i'i [.■■In.l';- 



•Ui; ',■■■'. I >\;,: I ■ •■.hUl 



o 



Js, 



5:-i 



r 



r 



/ 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice. 



Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justic^ 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 



\ 



\ 







I, A. 4 76 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
Al'G 1 Ty>0 i^Yyq opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



■ q ^su^iHsi:. ... 



':;.e 



,J'rijo3 iDr.s 



■tc 



Gen. ITo. 614 8 

William C. Sisgert, appellee 

va A >p9a,l from LaSalie. 

Publitj Scrvico Comp£,riy of Northern 
Illinois, V, Corporation anJ the City 
of Ottawa, appellants/ 

Carnss, J. 

This iB an s-p -ed from o. judgment of ^'3500 for '-"he 
plr.intiff in a suit F'rosecutad by William C. Sie^;grt, the 
appellee, aiy^inst -".he City of Ottawa, and Publio Sarvioo 
Company of Northern Illinoia, a aorporat. .-n to racover for 
injuries auatained by appellee by .rea.Bon of an alleged unsafe 
ooniition of a bridge en a publio street of i1:z oity. 
^ The Illinois rivav bridge ia 942 f^ist long, with -a drive-vay 
34 fset vdds, and nus on July 8, 1914, thr day in question 
the only meana of cro-jsing the Illinois river in the city 
of Otta-,va« There was a large amount cC travel acrcss the 
bridge inclaiing interurban ani street car traffic. There 
was l;~ii along the east aide of the wagon road of the bridf^e 
extending into the irivs-A-ay about eighteen inches iro.r. the 
side of the bridge an eight iiich gas pipe used bv •-- 
Publio Service Company, laid in sections joined by a flangw 
or expansion joint projecting two inches, so Ihat thg diameter 
of the pipe zinl flan^-^e was about tiv-lve inches. Thlo pipe 
was elcv^ited a f©w inches above '.he l-.vsl of *-he floor of 
the bridge on a oe.rent foundation, but" axtKKttRg ext-nndsd 
beyond the base on vhich it rested. It v?aa not covered or 
gu..rded in :tny .i^y and the flange or sxoansion joint A'as so 
conatru.;ted t'.iat a wheel aoraping alon.';^ i he aide of the 

pipe vvouii cathh on the flange. ^«- — ,^. a gardner 

aoquainted vith ^nl aocustomed to the uoe of thio briige. IT^v- 



an' *jel 005S'' lo ;^ne;ii:8t:i>'£ ja isoi^ Xjse oi eixlT 

lo' TevoofDi od- iT: iit^nio-r'soo a ^aiofliill attidiroVL to x^^qmoO 

= ""; -OiTU ie^s-T,;: n^i ^o iiOB^e'r. "^d soil ■ t9fllja:fai;a 3©iiJj{;ni 

-vJLit js- d*iv.' ,3noX *5f '1 £^e ei 33]. ii eionilll s. -flR 

fsoi JC'Sup rci v£i: :-riy ,MeX «8 YXi/I. no > , . 

siSffT .oil1>fiT^ lAo ^&9'xfB i a.c fSjstfii/is^tni; £■ i; osLXitf 

, ^ — . aqXci isijg ilonl ^rfgls as ©gl - 

iSv&mx;;^ rr.f „♦>;:? o?i ,asiioni: ow* gnlrfos^Qiq Jnio^ aotaajaqxe 10 
sqi-; OiTiT .eerfoo.i QvX'?/;t itwodTjc e-w »^fl£Xl Inc »qlq eu ' .0 
5-3 Tc^o:^ cv!- 'to X^ ovod^s esrionl vSl i^ tei'iiv©Xs .. 

tf*l'.'.c-}y^ y^aiiem.J-rs. iu<S ^tioti- ao ȤXXtu . 

lij icTvvoo .ton a.'i'?. il .LeJ-er :-ro &im<J en:' iuOYsd 

erfi^ lo 8: ; .' i:s*..u-!i6noo 

-J ^ ^..''^^. — ^ — -— -h^ .V :o lldd-XiC kiUOv^ OCitq 

;.'ii? Xie*xiX£ijpoj3 



drove onto it with a horse tliat ws-s sorreffhi/.t arraid cf 
cars ;ini , et a street car .Hie horac shisl to the ei-at o-s 
tliG car paesel him, .nJ just then another car Cciire up. The 
horae bscomin^-; mere frightened veered to the east ;.n 1 stiTtea 
to run. The Isft wheel of the wagon Btruck a-Cvinst the ga 
pipe a fc-.v fset from a flange. The '■,h:?el alii -.Icn;^ until 
it hit ti'.e projection oi'' the flange. The wagon ^..-a tiirown 
into the air by the fcrje of the ia.; act i^ni a pellee i-.ro-ftn 
out un .1. inj.urel. 

-^TO — li^Ti_j_ no ^ubat-i. ti-^1 error prsjulioial to the ai,*i»rtTrini 
in ths ;;;ivirAf; or raTtro4jas_f^f instruotiji**'^^^o sn cr in 
sing on the ij-!troauction_£;«— "^Ti rStrs-^^^s suir^cted. Arpcllee 
3U;Tgs3ts 3rr£>-l?i i v'iiig iiiUtructionG ..■or~^S^-^»«.^antB, hut 
^e^ric cro3;j ^rror i :: filed Ir.at question is not before^ 

The court instructed tbe jury, ^t the insstance ex a-j.pel- 
lunts except us nacdifiad by ; _e insertion o' '.he ciauae In 
paranthsoiB, as follc'^ct- "T: ■. t -niixe it io the aaty of i^ 
city to nac r;a8on-\blri oc^re to k ep it -> '.trasts in t r^aucii- 
ably Gafc oonlition to irive upon, it has th-?. rignt to dsvots 
ths e-idca of tV." street to ctl-:-^r uc,eCul public purposes. 
It .r;ay cOi- tract :,iia.YalkB c i - higher ^r.is ;.n 1 ^ttttera 
of a lever :jrade than th-s irivev.ay, pi.„ce curbing on ;:.e lins 
of the ?;uttersit, srect hy-irantg nd authcriae tr"-' rsotion 
of hitching po^ta, telephone, ts^egraph „n.l eiectric light 
poles -nd the laying of .vater ard ^cs pipe© (,ioviied tjja' 
in tio -oing ';he iitrsets regain in ^ rcsscriabiy oafe coniition 
for public uaa.) It .-.ny thus to "X re::i.9cn ibis extent an I 
for a u.eiul jcuxjtaAa public pur.;c&e narrow tV.c hrivsway and 
excluda oca.TS a; a horses alto, ether t'rom the .si ies of the 
streeta," y^ 
Ap.jcllants obj/i ct tc tr.e rodif ica,tion. We think the instruc- 






©£iiorf 



;;fno evoTi 



.osq liso ocid 



dill .fli> 



itinu snoXx; tilt* Xosriv sxfT •»QiiJ=li s suoii i-as; 

awoii't sew flog^w sffT .9;3«i5ll; arf^ 'lb noi^os^O'^tq •^'^i/itf-^X 

toieo' *aa ex aoitesiip d"i;;iJ t&Xlx ei luiis ««-©so^^'o5'"«§' 
fli Bnuslo sii' -o aoiissaai o.. vd iailxi'jffl aj3 i-q^sozfe «ua«i 

s^gvaL od d^il3i7 eiLi mail i: ^aon,sj Qvtii. oi aoltlLaoo oljaa ^^X<f£ 

cflil s;::j flo galcftii/c 0o~;lq ^'i^a.iQMtxL oiii xtoilJ sJb^tj} 4©woX 

CTEi i>;l.; ^371-?. a seoqiaaf^ oiXduq SJucJiXirai Xjjj«>,-jj x. 
"-v -i^i >jtlj& assioii x.':jk a.Ti^hi BLuLaxo 

0' io-^i^tfo e^n^^fi.-- A 



^ 



■tion as mo;iiried, is a fair •st-tsrrent of the law applicable 
to the oa,Be. It loes not rrisan as appellants ar^^ue, that 
there is :.n imp-rative Juty onthe 3ity to keep it:; -.treets 
in a reasonably eafa ooniition for public uae that is not 
answered by exercisittg reaaonable. car-: in that rrctter, but 
it .ioeo n-,ean tliat a city is not as a rule juatifiad in ir^vcting 
ths sides of the streets to public pur-oaea that -.ill rnnier 
tlie streets unsafe for public use. Tie queaticn in tUia 
Co.06 ia jiimilar to "liat in Drennan v City of St-3ator, 168 
111. App. 134 affiriisd by the supreme court in 35G 111, 468 
As 3aid by the auprsme cotirt - "The qusstion arisls in each 
case ..'hother the obstruction is oC r.uch :c. charaotar that the 
passenger usinr the atrset or the aiiewalk in the ordiriary 
way :.i.ni using ordinary cars for hi 3 c.vn safety io exposed to 
an unneceaoary an J. iinrsasonabls risk." 

Thii: ic a question for the ^ury unless ths circurtritar.oes are 
such that but one reasonable ana'.ver can be rr;ade. In the 
present oaac v:e regard the circumstances such t'lat rsaaonabls 

inis might differ in answering the question, therefcrs it 
could not properly be ^vithirawn from toe jury by a iir--otei 
vcriict. Yet the trial court v/as charged on the rrotion for 
a nevj trial •..ith a .luty to detsrinine '.vhether the ver lict was 
manifsstly a.;ainat the weight of the svidsnce, :-nd -'.'e are 
rfiQuired to review the judgment of the trial court in refusing 
to grant a new trial on 'hat ^rovind. The .•r;ajcrity of the 
court ure of the opinion that the evi.lsncs ices not support 
an af f irniative anovifer to 'the question ao st. -he aupra-re 
oourt above quoted, anJ 'Viat the ends of juatioe r -q.jire the 
submission oC the facts to another jury. 

■R-=. versed ...nj re.Tianded* 



m 



ton ei ^•Si*:t ©eif oijdtrfif !r< /Ideffot. .i 

tad ,isi^^3'-ft *^rfv' ^iitalon^xi) ifcf I^si»w3fl>£ 

eiit;r at itQXi&sdjgt alT » iicftiq; .^nu Bi^Q'ti.' 

3a^ .XXI 35S fli j-'uroo eins'r:j,i;«8 s£fit t«^ i>s3^il!iljs *fiX .qqA .ill 

' 9dt ttl .©Jbsss. 9d.- n.so ■ssi^aiiJa 9x^sm-:miiiO'x 9ao iuti Smi^' douB 

•n* 5v X:r;ji tsorrabxvs -Si^;^■:'2:© ^frf^isw srf-* teiTi*;:^- YXcfae'iltiJa-ri 

etl^ ':o^?i:io^^?i ajrfT - *l>«0oij; *^i ,«o JUiir* wen -^ *rti3*r^ oi 
ttccqvs .;f©n seoi ©ofjstiv© »xf.t;*jBifd- aoJLaXqo «u:f-ld ^ijh iii/oo 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) , 

SECOND DISTRICT. i '^'^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuPFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my liaud and affix the 

seal of the said x\ppellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



i .' ' ;.L::i!;''OT>.:tT! 
^1 ■l:iaii--i;'j <." -,■' ' 



f-v -^j- 



^^ 



\./- 



J 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 




y 



■^^-. 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice. 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 



■1 






\ 



\ 



/ 



/ 



/' 






BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AUG 1 ^ 191^ the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit; 



;aTAJja~ ■ fo mMT a '£ 



,i.;. Tq.'^ "ic "t^b rfv+tuo^ 5di ,y.i>' .-';■• .. ■■ . ••• ■> ■•• -■ ..: 



oa i i - 



•» i- 1 



brfj lo \to cTtsia "' ' ''tii 



,-rfj-;irv.. ■^Txriae-T^T -^gUAHSi;^ .ivi viHOL .noii;:;d': 

,do^t?>rC ,JJ2SIC lOf^Aaaoa .noH 
, -! T e ' : ) J Y'^'^UG . flaH"! OT 8 I^HO 



■■ .ci t , .1 i a i .^ ri ; 



Gon. ilo. 624^. 

W, L. c Cloud, 

•Appolloo, 
-VB- Apioe al iron Iroquois. 

\'I, H. Iloglo and 

Pranlc /uCfilTDrGatli, 

Appellants, 

CAPn;3S, J. 

V/, L. I'cCloud, tlio appellee, svud. V/. H. Hogle , the ap- 
pellant. Olid, one Franl-z I, Gillsroatli, in ;:ji action on the case 
for fraud and deceit in the representation of title to a tract 
of land, Tlioro vr.:,s a jirrj trial and a verdict of not guilty 
directed as to C-injroatli, and verdict and judgnent ajjain t ap- 
pellant for 0834,87, fron wMcli jud-gmait tMs ap 'cal is taken. 



^ 



.'iie facts diGcloccd by tlie evidence «*4) en. 
as f ollov/s : - ^'b ^ tho gln^" in n;i o 3 4 ) ij ■:';., '.t^mi:: -j , IC'i:;^ ^ / ^jjul^ . 



r_'.Qx in automoTDilec . *— - — ,:;ldcn| ■ i - vocjiol::. ■■ Ocniil: ' jA -- li:v: L . u .. 
^l^liC^ ^ - fc — ■< '.Ta a norc}iant^ gt "' ..:\tiuI:::, tiig - cj'-ui:" . ;no:-t j- 

ca3v,.-.r-iM;:,-.vir a-t!: h' mi'Iihi"; " I ii I '^ GilLroatli on au'l bo- 

fore llay 7, 1910, ov^aed ono Inmdred tvrenty aeroc of land in 
Issaqneno. County, Ilicsissippi, aubjoct to a^ort:;r.;G d: ' ■ ; > •—' -^ 



Tj i JLli ' iJ^>!. GUixLj-.v! :":L. . lljf ocd - Oo: . ? i - Bn;> of about ySoO, On tli.-... da. to 
ho g0.ve a aecond .ort5af;o on tlio land to ono Sari Pimiey to aocp.re 
an indobtodnoss said to liabo groxm oiit of Ijuchet shop trans ^ctioni: 
There being default in pyyriicait of t:o.G : :ort";,-a:,e Pinnoy doroclosod 
the eq.Tilty of reflenption in a proceeding in the chancery court of 

-1- 



4:^23 .oT; .no^ 



, 'j/ol 



• ttloirpQa:! jTOtrl iGwqA -av- 



iJiL;- 0I30E ,E .V/' 



.ad-risij; 



CIO sLoiioa mi at ,£JsoicfX; . .. .a ono J&ue ,*iicXIoq 
1 t-xt^iev s i)ixs inx'ul T^j-sxrt. ,-3 ai-.w o^coxPT .Anal lo 




V^^ 



if-i 'Wf.' 



o^j :!:o vi-j- ■;■■ -r ■■?:": 

.00 edil 



Isscouona Coiuity, Tho record of tliat court sIiottg liliat on Do- 
cein"ber G, 1911, th'ro wis a findijxg " That pulallcation hiis "boon 
duly mao in the manner and form and for 'Siie time required "by lavr", 
and GillDreath and his T7ife, the defeMants in the siiit, •'.-ore de- 
faulted and the "bill talren as eonfoGsed against then, ffiic next 
day a decree of cale ■,;;■ sentered l)arrin{; the defendants* enxiity 
of ree^igption upon the malcini^ of tiie sale. The sale v;aB made 
pursuant to the order in tlie decree to Sam Finney for C500. -which 

xras approved "by the court July 17, 1912. llore tlian a year ► 

afterv;ards, Ausuct, 1913, n^ — . offered to trcKlo /^^^"""T ^^ 
Gilbreath's oupposed equity in this Icdid for an autoaohile valued 
at §1650, staling positively that tlio titlo to the land .as in 

Grilhreath subject only to tho -ortgago, ^ . .-:.:.lroa: — -^ . 

A "bargain v;as made eaid ' I J^^ - reigned a memoranda in writing 
in wloich he agreed to fiu-nish a deed of conveyance fron the 
owner of the land t: /-^^-~1^-»Ij^ ;. to clear the land o.: on- 
Gumhrance and pay y650. in cash for the autonohile. — - — ?■ — -» 
inquired ahout the vo-lue of the land a;jd the a ount duo on t: . ■^^-t"'*^ 
r ail - L.- 3 a d c Ky^r^-^ ' ;:. _ortgage .which ho learned wr.s $2G1,0G. *-^^ 
^^^r^^tm procured Gilhrea.th and wife to coir;rey the land hy warrant/ 

deed td / t^ - :' - . . : <:^ : ; ject only to tlio 'j^l'}-.if^ ' , — i-r- nortgage, 

and gave /^-—^—---^ is chock covering the v)650, cash payment and 
the $261.05 necessary to ::-ay .'.nd discharge tho nortgage, and to.h 
tho automohile. -Jr^^ — ^ f ^5 the ra ortgago and cent a release 
with his deed to Issaquena County for record and did not discover 
for several months afterwards that he jXIv"! no title to the Irnc, 
-^ — y had trade? Gilhroath an old automohilo for his supposed 
equity of redemption, and say^Hie jiad no Iniowledge of a second 
mortgage and tliat ho procTired the doed direct fron Gilbroa-th and 
wife to TieCiaud to save a recording fee, ajid for no other ;ourpoce; 



...rroo a. od-Irst 



a >v; 



'^^^^''~:^:^^^ oLBi^ ^1!£. 









^-X/'"'^' 



't::^i^5^v»-vAi^5>^v, 






-—-^ '70 






A. 






that he supposed tliere T;as no other encurjihrarie a on the laM, 
thoujjh Cfilbreath had heforo told him -uliero ttc.s a jiTdgnent aipiiist 
him dovm there in Mississippi hut it " ■: :?-_: :. jamhlin;;: dehr- and. 
was not good; tint he did not tell ^ ^ffi/lTT^ ^ "--."■ the .judgnent 
hecaune ho did not consider it valid; ho al..L.^:- itjcTer stood a 
gamhling judgment was not rcood, and that Gilhreath had told hin 
thore "57:3 no service on him; and ho took Gilhreath' s vrord that 
the .3iid,:TEient was invalid. 

John P. Pallissard, a la-tvyer '.rho ;7as represent in;-: Gil- 
hreath in the trial of this case, nas c oiled hj-/^^----^^ 3 a 
witness and testified that he •;reT)a.red the deed from Gilhreath 



and wife to/ v-^^T >-~ --%*> ^ > instance, but th:t a^t sonotinE 

J)rior to that transaction - ■ . ,. -^ .id come to him to inqiiiro 

about tho land and caid Gilbroath had sugg:osted tiip t he do so, 
Pallissard at t'lo tirae knov; something about tho ti'Q.e and loiow 
about the J-inney mort>';a;5e. He testified that he v:Qnt into the 
title pretty thoroughly in his discussion witli ,— IZ2— -— ,; that 
the Pinney mortgiigo may not have been mentioned by na e but it 
was mentioned that there was a second raortgage. — ; — ^^- — ? doniea?*^ 
this conversation and denio^_tha.t he v/i.s ever infor::.od by anybody 
before tho deed was made that thoro w::.s a second ortgai:o on the 
Imid, /(y ■ ■, 

IThethor appellant Imow of a second r.iort5'a2:e depends upon 

the credit to be riven to Pallissard^ s and apvellantM:- tostiraony 

knew 
as to th-'-t m^tterl That lie /thore \7as a second encumbrance, 

valid or invalid, appears from his own testimony, and there i&' no 

(question t'lat he told appellee there was no cnc:^r.ibrance oth.er tliaa 

the railroad mortjafre, The .jiu'y were warranted in heliovin;; 



^^^i^..:* 



' oocT 



J 'j,i>ji;»'isiJ._ 




t ollw JBcci3 



bs 



!ra>l 



•; «^w- ii,'j.i^ 



■> .in 



Palllssard instead of appollant if in tlioir .j dgnent lie r;- s mere 
worthy of belief, and appollant can liardly loo exeueed for stc:tinj; 
that tliero \7,"S no f^econd onctim"b ranee wlien lie Imd notice t'lat there 
tras a,j,jivLri; orit liased on a garal^ling rlelat on the groimd tliat ho sup- 
posed, as matter of law, such a •iidg-ient -jould Le void. It 
therefore follows that apoollant nade a aaterial stateraent to 
appellee as to the title of tlie land tliat he knew was false or hixl 
no good reason to holieTo \7 s true. It is conclusiToly proven 
that appellee believed the represontc-.tion and acted on it, and 
was induced thoreby to trade for the lam* Under tho eirc-Tostances 
v;e do not thinJi appellee should be clnrgod v/itli nogliscrzje in 
acting on tliat state-:ient. therefore appellant became liable to ■ 
appellee in an action for fraud and deceit, and if there is no 
substantial error of law in -the record the verdict and QUdjpent was 
properly rendered a£;aingt him. 

Appellant objected to the testinor^ of Pallissard on the 
ground tliat he was an attorney acting for C-ilbreath to the ease; 
also on the ^ra'ound that he was enplSyed by Hogle to draft the deed 
from Gilbreath aM wife to appellee and whatever was there said 
was privileged, ffiie iD-vr is v/oll settled that while it is un- 

ethical and bad practice for a lawyer to act as both attorney and 
witness in the sa o case, still ho is not disnualifled as a x/it- 
ness. As to the other objection Pallissard testified to nothing 
that ocuurred at the time ho drafted the deed that had any baaring 
on the question of ajpell-ant^s prior knowledge of the title. It 
is therefore unnecessary to discuss the qiiestion whotlior he wa;; 
disQualifiod from testif^/'ing to a conversation that ocuurred at 
that time. His evidence as to appellant *s Iniowledge of the 
second ortgage rel'.tcd to a time when it is not claimed he wc.o 



,JCE0 liitooos on B, W QlOlli tfBlii 
no bQBa(^^^tOf.'QLal..,si EMJtr 

■xslXerf Oit iiioi-^o- JJoo^ on 
• inl a£5W 

olloqga 



. 3rf* Sfsrorr^ 

' no 

'■ y. j- 



<H ir. 



acting as ap ellant's attorney. Vie coxicliiclG tliat liis testii-^oiay, 
so far as material, xic^s properly admitted, 

C Proof was adi-^itted 07er apoellant's oTjjectlon by autiienti- 
catecL copies of tlae Hortgage to Tinney, the o.ecreo of the Ilississippi 
cliancory coiirt foreclosing that -lortrpogo, and the deed to Piniioy 
Blade by tlie eomnissionor a-o-oointod "by tlie coiirt nnrsuant to the - 
doer ; . ^'^ It "wp.s objected in the court bolov?- to the authenticated 
copy of tho mortgage that it vras "Hot proiiffly certified and inoom- 
pleto and irmaterial . She attostations are not full enou<];h," 
The trouble pointed out here is that the certificate of the 
clerk recites thjiit lie is es-officio recorder and the certificate 
of the .judge fails to recite that the clerk is also recorder, V.o 
are inclined to the opinion that tho objection sufficiently 
pointed out thr.t defect and tiiat it was error to ad^nit the record 
of tho nortgage, She objection to tho authenticated record of 

tho d eed made by tho coLimissionGr to Pimiey \7tis " Per the reason 
that thero is no lau of the State of Mississippi in evidence 
showing tint tho coiirts of th?t state had the pov/er to appoint 
a commissioner to raake sale of tliis land, nor any law of the state 
offered in eYiden.-;© showing that the proceedings under this 
exhibit b^tq according to tlio statute of that state, or that the 
court hacl. xirisdictlon of the of. icers and ti. e subg'.eetiaattor to 
proceed as therein otatod#" This objection did not point out 

the defect hero conplainod of and we '^""o of tho opinion that tho 
couj?t did not err in admitting that '_■ orer. thit objection, 

The auth.enticated covy of the record of the foreclDSiiro proceedings 
was objected to on the ground tliat it did not show persoiial ijcrliee 
on the defendants and that tliero is no evidence shorring wlvat the 
laws of the State of rississippi are, or tha' Gervioo could "bo 



f\'^ rff\ .- 



!) 



^ 



:'e -''' Oil'i 



i:p<r do/: jjt'> fv 

'. ion. hJ:>i i: 



■.■i:c'-L'fri5 



■■^ r>i: ttfff* """"^ r""**! )?5^ 



had Uj^on the ^'exencTaats by pulDli cation as tlicroln o own; tiiat chore 
is no e\''icl.eiTC'ej iini"^.er 'diQ loxis of tJie State of Ilississippi sho:":lng- 
that the cDurt had jurisdiction of the defendats or of tho suhjoct 
matter. Hiore vr:,s no ohjection to the regularity of tlie certi- 
ficates. Appellant's argximeait here is that tlica^e heing no cyI- 
denco of the laxrs of I'is issippi the presiimption is that they 
arethe sane as the loxrs of Illinois, and that the decree is "bad 
in not reciting an affid-avit supportin-? a puhlication and in not 
shovTin;; that suirrions rras issued and returned "Hot fotmdE, 

The attack on the decree is collateral, iThc rule is nuite 
different in cases of direct attack. ( 12 A b H I^ncy. 909) A 
foreign judgnent trhich is valid *,7]iere rendered laay he enforced in 
another jurisdiction altliough it is not founded on personal service, 
(ih) " V/liere the copy of a record of a sister crtr.te judrpment 

whicli it is son^'ht to enforce shows tliat thoconr '. rendoriiig ciich 
judgment was a county, district or circuit court -.vith a presiding 
judge, a clerk and a seal, aad therefore a court :;f record, it nc^y 
be presumed that the eotu't tv: s ono of general jin'isdiction, " 
(il),997) "A prosunption of jurisdiction oh tains nhore a court 
of general jurisdiction proco )dc to litigate a cause, UjiIoss 
t^.ei'o is a s' owing in the record "Siat there 'v7;^s no jurisdiction," 
(Forrest v Fey, 218 111, 165) In pleading a foreign judgirent 
of a court of general jurisdiction it is not necessc'r^,- to set 
out the facts or laws conferring jurisdiction which v.lll he pre- 
suned SKi: bsk and can be controYerted only by clear gnd full proof, 
(£3 CyclSSS) In an rction on a judgment recoYored in another 
state, it T7i 1 be presumed tliat the court had juricdictlon of the 
subject matt • and the parties in the absence of proof to the 
contrary, although the record may bo inconplete or ambigmoua on this 
point, ( 25 Cyc, 1577; VanHeter y Sankey, 148 111. Er3C; Horonthal 






LTd-cn 



avfa.'. or : 



■:ic -^x^^zoc 



: doxt Hi 
;^xilwcrf8 



.lals'xo^ 






.cTJr) 



.0^0 5S ) ♦drtxog 



T Reniel:, 44 111. £0E) In aii action of dclot on a judsr.ieiit of 

another state by a court of rpneral jiirisdietion, tl-ie record "oein ■ 
Gilont as to service of -iroceGS, the j^ud-'ment is pri!:;ia f:acie 
evidence of jiirisdietion. "ITotJiinp; shall he intended to he out 
of tho jurisdiction of a superior court hut that r/hich speciall;/- 
appears to ho so," f Drnihar v Hallowell, 34 111, 168 J Soo also, 
f Sundry v Hancock, 14S Ill.App, 49, 5E) \71iere it is sought to 
prove tho contents or osiGtonco of a, judgTiont of a sister state 
an authenticated copy of the jW.'^nent itself is adfdssihle in 
evidence, and si.ifficient, ( Chj3-mho rlain r Britten, 136 Ill.App. 290; 
affinAed in E34 111, Sdo) A jud;3;ment in rem by a court of com- 

petent jurisdiction in one state cannot oo collaterally assailed 
in another. ( 23 Cyc. 1591) V.liorc c jadgnont Ix:.s ']:i&qii obtained 
there is a strong legal prosu^;ptlon th^.t the court Iiac. jurisdiction 
and til at it proceeded conformably to the la\?s of the state in ^rhich 
it T7-S ro:i£lered. f V.'olch v Sykos, 3 Gilnan 197; Binoler v Dawson, 
4 Scannon, 536; Ilorton y Critch.fiold, 18 111, 153; yireron's Ins, 
Co, V 31ionpson, 155 111, £04) It i3 bruo if tho record dis- 

closod want of jurisdiction tlie judg.:ont i,70uld ho treated as a 
nullity, but mq concluc'e, under the authority of the above cited 
cases, that the recital in the r 'Cord that there u;::s duo service 
by publication cannot at loast be tahen as eho\7ing a ~ant of 
service, and that in a collateral attaci: it is not noeessary that 
the record should show eitlier tlie lav;s of "ississippi r-s to ser- 
vice by publication or that every iiidi¥idual stej ~/as taken that 
the lav/s of Illinois require to roake a ,";ood service by publication, 
r^e conclude that the record of the foreclosure :oroceedlngs a,nd of 
the deed thereunder divesting Gilbroath of all title to the 1 rnd 
is properly in evloence and tJiat i':^ is tlitis shovm without the 
record of tlio ortgage that Gilbreath had no title to the lend at 

-7- 



■ :0S .III M ,:Ioiirea T 

oo.tvTO"-- Co ' &£ioLla 

i M ^Xi- •"-- ' .Oa OCf C* BX88CTC[B 

-• ■;'>..--•■■;'-' , --.:^ Finn ,eoneoive 

, . ... ...^ , ^. .." il 

.-. ^-, . ....o .. ^3S9 .rtornrisoS i' 



; ,803XS0 
-IcfJiq -^jtf 

• " -095 edi 

.. -■Jliocrorrq: al 



the time in question. 

It is obooctod tKat imder tlio instructions of tlie court tlie 
valtiQ oi' tho automo'bilo was takcsi zs tlac ;ieasuro of damages, and 
not tho raluo of tlio Missicsioyii la.nd. TZo tMnli: tliero is no error 
in tliis rosp0<':t, Appolloe parted ?i tin his automolDilo, Jlaoro is 
n6 (luootion a out its raluo. Kiat mrt of tlie consideration rest- 
ing on the I'ississippi land entirely failed. In eii action ona 
contract v/hore the TQi^doi'' rocdii".' /linr; for his praoerty iDocause 

of failure of the vendee to doliycr j-I'j anpreod property in ex- 
change , he iG entitled to ro over the value of his goods, f Bool^er 
V V'olf, 195 111. 565) If appolleo had received ai:y title to the 
land and had lost through the fraud and deceit o;: appellant a 
portion of the value that -e should liavG received, tliOii the pro- 
per inquiry T.-ould hs-vo heon as to the value of the land and rrliat 
part of it he lost, She rule in covcaiant is that for a total 
breach of the covena-nt of oeizcn, or good right to convey ,T7here 
nothing passes "b^r the conveya,nce, the -ioasure ot daLr^ges is tliO 
ainount of concideration paid ajid interest. ( Home v .;;..lton, 117 111. 
130, 135, citing £ Sunderland on Damages, So 7, and Eraser v 
Supervisors of Peoria Counter, 74 111. 282) It is indicated in 
that case ( Ilorne v TZalton) that the sa.)ne rule applies in action 
for fraud and deceit. 

Appellant* s objections to the instructions are covered 
by v/hat v/o have already ro-id. If the judgment must rest on th.o 
tostinony of ^allissard contradicted by that of s.ppellant as to 
appellant's knowledge of the second nortgage, ^x• still are r.ot in- 
clined to disturb the verdict of the jury based on rallist^^ard's 
t stiBiony. It apoears that Gllhrciath t/.s insolvent. Ap.^oll nt 
undortool: to cQnvey the title to this li-.nd to airoolloo cloar of 
all encumbrance by the method that he himself select o:T, It ic 

-8-' 



^aox':r'o:;y. nx efEiid ed* 



MOO eiC# lo aaoattisK-i 



snila-v 









' \l JU ^-ft-f w . 






^ag-.: 



■■■■:. lo •!:.;•■ 









:rf 



JS 



'3Td"cirjone IXa 



only simple .justicG if he did not Irnor; of tlie oncam'braiK; g that lie 
Bliould i.olro good Is tmderto.lcin'-;. But in bringin;^; the action in 

this .'oiTii appelloc ■to.dertooir tho oiirdcn of provin'' f-ro,vA exJ). 
deceit. -riie Jury found a, verdict in his favor on tlu.t issue. 
She trial court a.pproved it, and tto see no good reason for dis- 
tur"bing it. Pinding :\o t^ubs tantlal orror in the roeord the 
judgment ifj affined. 

Affirmed, 



-9- 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, [ 

SECOND DISTRICT. ( ^^" I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my oflBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 






f.fn. h 









AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 




Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 



in the year of our Lord one thousand nin^ hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of ^^he State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presi|ing: Justice. 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES , Justice. 

Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. 

CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Cle|k.?1. p- f\ — • ,>, _. 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AM^ .1 n iqic the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



-;•.-..■. . ■ , 1 :^ -.-v^: , 'III' 









CJen. :Io. 6/634. 

Froi Pierss, ippsilae 

V3 Appeal frora LaSalle 

Villtf-./c of Ncrlli Utioa, appellant. 
Carnee, J. 

Appellee rred Fleroe, cly.i:i:e to h/ve "o^en smployed by 
the appclii».nt vill^-gt- to *id in the -.ucrantiriS cf one 
Cyrue Ycurig uffiictel .*itu afi.ail pox. '--ni confinei to ii house 
in ouia viilUffj-e. rl& a.aai iuei arpella-rt b-sfore a justice cf 
the peaoe for th:lrty foux l^^y^i acivias a-t ^3.0C a aay, 
ClOi. .00 the contr&ct rpioe, r.ni had ju^^^msnt there for 
tas^-t arfloui-t. Tic v'iilr„,^-e appfcalei '.o tne circuit court 'vaerg 
he had juigEcnt on .x ^^craict ^'or 'he aaiie u-ii-cunt. Tue village 
proseoutas this appeal ani asks i r^vareal on ths ground 
thitt tho court srrei in refusing a persmptory instruction 
for the def er.-iant, ^nl tbiit tne verdict ic against the Itiw 
anJ tha eviirrnca. There id no criticienf. In its brief j-ni argu- 
ment on :-ay ruling in he iatroluctionof evi isnce, or ~ivirr 
or r:-f using instructions except tha p^rsmptory instruction. 

Appellant's theory of the iuw is t 3cLt undar our 
statutes citiaa r.vni villages :.ra liable fo" :uarE>ntine cxpen- 
33a, but in no 3vcnt in a c.'^se of thia kind coul:l t^ey become 
liable for the oxpenae of nfcraing; -hat if Young had money 
or property to pay for his nui'aing it was :cr hire to do so. 
If not, it waij £, oou:ity charge undi;r ths provlsiona of 
paragraph 2-4, chapter 107, Ilurda Rsviaed Statutes. The 
decision of thia court in City of Spring Valley v County of 
Bureau, 115 111. App. 545 io cited vith other c-ses in oupport 
of that position, which, .vithout further iiscuuojon as will 
aacuii;C to bs t);s lav,'. Appsliant saya triat tne cervices per- 
for/rsd by appellee wore aa nurse cr attendant ani -nere not 
such as the village was scipiovvered to contract for; tlierefors, 



S8Xl3qq£ tSC-xoi^ to'il 

96uod £ o.t ts-ciilnoo trr* jcoq Llsme dit*. i:3JoxIll-i 3000!' jiix^D 
?o 93x;f30(; ^ 3toat>d *r£aXIsqqj9 l;9iJ8 |3£2 3K .ss^^IiJtv i,x^cj ni 

jbm/o5s sfii no i^i^teVBi s sia-e fcnii X^eqqja eirii- eex'ijosaoaq 

ixoi;^cu;i:l-6ai: v;io:'qHi9iaq js g^-^®'^'^'^^ '^-^ tOiis tiuoo oxI.t Jjerij- 

wjiX srf^ taats^ii si fmbi^v arid- i-iiii;J^ lac ^ia^^.-istaL 3d.:i aol 

-ifgiij tfToc l$cid e^i ni maxcid'i'xo on ei a-isrfT .©onj;£:xvs' srij lae 

-r.lvi-. 50 .eonalxvs "ionox^oi/Ioiii... a sniXwi y"-s no waaa 

lUO ttatriij ^ad^ Qi w^I eric! lo-^tT^'^Sfiu s'tfo^sIIaqqA 

-usqxe 8ni:;fn.:-ifu: 'o'^ sXdasxX ^ts eagjaXXiv £.«£ asJtifio ecifw^fid'a 

v^nocsa ^Si-:t i-.X^ot. Xnl:t aid:! lo oa^-o £ c2 tfnsvs on ni -JJCf «a&& 

vsno.T t-cri ^ni/oY "i-X ^£;; 43«isiiiin lb S8n&q*o Dj.'. lo'i &Xdi:XI 

,oa cL s«t ffliii 10 fi-::a "i- ^nXit'xwii eiri lol X^ ot ^d"i©qo-.::: 10 

I0 ar.olhLvQ'i':: Oilj -iaijift.^ sgi^i^o Y-'""'oc ^ ajsw ;tl »*ok II 

adT .adi-i/Jj-jg t9e>i;<f.x.;-; aiiuH «70I io:fqj3rio »*>* riqjcijjxsi^q 

:. ^^-Tuon V X'sr^jY ^^aXj.vg lo ^^ iO nl i-woo &tdi I0 noxcccrsi 

-Uu al aae^o ir.:-fc rf^Xw bQi io ot 5^5 .qqA .XXI eXX ^U^siuS 

-s. noj":esi/caXi isrijij:-; i>fJodil^ ,doid\i ,fioiitXac;q i'Ar:* lo 

-icq aGoXv'jtas ^.Ml;t' i-j3ifJ ev^i-s i nxti: XsqqA .wjsX e;fi »d o^ anmes*; 

.> aasun ti^ aT:ow osXXsqq.T x^i Xeih^ol 



without controverting the evii;;nce that a.rp©ilee'.va,e em- 
ploys! by authorized oxX^icGra oi" I'ha village to p^rforir th^ 
earvicss at thut prioe, it insiijts that thsrs oan be no 
reoo'/cry becj-uss of a want of authority of the viiiac;;e to 
make such a contract. 

It appears that Young waa 3ick 'with aniall pox in z. houatr 
in ths vill ge; tha,t[^he house ^-aa cuarantined r,ni 3>opgllo» 



~ Lu j'uj<i'L^o of Iho ^.-ti^ntw - \[ police o_-'ric?.r broufjht fool 
to/ ^ ...r -^y -nl -Vne pc.tient. :V , r^.-, . : ;.:!: charge of ^:be 
food ini r-inained in the house rrsuking sure of the decired 
end that no ono should be permitted to co";e ir. nonte-ct .-ith 
the 3ick rnan. / It sesms to ua that whatever terat© were u^od 
in t-ic employitiont of ap{;eileo by appellant that it ;TC;;.nt t.aii,t 
his services should seours a quarantine. An effT-otive 
quarantine could not hive been carried out without sonie one 
doing eubotantially what a.i-pC-lee did. \Thile the facts of the 
case present a question of aome difficulty -e Ic not think 
th3 preauifiption from t.hoae faots that apr-allee was -ngj.ged 
an i sciployed in a qu,~rantine service is so n.anifestly agiiinst 
the weight of the evidence that ive ought to lisaturb the 
ver iict. The juign'.ent is affirmed. 

Affirmsd. 



r^ 



OG 9i-' n£0 eisid* ieiii' utotutit tl ,eoiiq . sooivi&s 

Jcooi o'i^ucrrJ T»oi"">o <*$iX<«» V -»--— -~-r''~ . Ij -,"H'«-uu ..1 Juii- 

t^i- ts^^fTf ti #J8rft. */ii5XXsqqB ''t<^ sdXXdcjo^-ld (tn- r'{oXq;tK ? '^ nl 
• a^i^tx^'rla n&. .;»fli#fi.sT:ja»p ^ a«fjj©.9« fcliwrfB aaoif-^^ 

a: >si 9/ii aXlrfW -iiii> S5. i^sf'w x'-^XjSi^^nirttitfuB gxrliodb 

ijo^.^as 33W 3©i:Xocq« #£ai.i: e*04&i Ofiod.-" aroii ttolfqaue^tq si? 
Jaa4£g£ ^r*es^xaui!ift ©s ex aoiviss ©ni^n^ttJtajp -"- fii bsYoX- 
srt.j diifd'eir. oa *i-.^a «w ^£a'cJ dCoeXXve e 

»t£Hf7XfiA 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) ^ Chpistophfr C Duffy, Clerk of the Appellate 

SECOND DISTRICT. i J-< UHRISTOFHi<.K «^. i^urri. 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my ofBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my band and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

. , ol'___ in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



xil';- i.n.' 



■•^-""J i- -■■5;>fL:(..,h ''' 7 




6298 

/ 

AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 



Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding Justice. 
Hon, DUANE J. CARNES , Justice, f 
Hon.'DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. | 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk, 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. 



2p0 I.A. 5 28 




BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AUG 1 n 19lD ^j^g opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



, - ri p:-L .8:FTiflA0 „L Si 

: ^' <::ij ,Y^r'ira .0 ilk, 

.1\i ■.?■ '^ :1 8 , 8 T 



J va; ": '■ no i aJ qo ad.- 



aen. ::o, 6298, 



-TD- Ap.:9al from ;/ooria, 

Illinois Contral ?,ailroad 

■ Pi^oria Cc .?oki.n XJnion nnU.- 
Tjray Coupaiiy, 

Ap ^ollojits. 



Appolloo, JiOJiry 3-. Iloron, r.isrfcj-fiv-o joars of .. r;o, 

in '" '£«[,''» 191^, TJBs, aad nacl l)Otai for .arjy ^ocrs, i:'-i tlio 

onpioy of tiiG y:'Goria £: }?o]iin Uu:-on ivailr/ay Gorivxiii^, one of 

the aivellants, an a SGction rtm., 2Iiat conpaay otttj-Ou -i 

yard rrltih. £rs7itcli tracizs in t'ao Tieinitjr of woslo^f City, 

Illinois, 2iie tiior r. -lolloiit, Illinois CGJit3?al ?; :'. road 

CoDpany, ao leseoe, oporatod cortaxji. tr-ins oti-)!- aid tr cli:s* 

Appolloo w3S tlaoroii{:j".ly .£ira;!-li.o,r uitli Mio yard and tlio 

man 'or of :r)oratijapr trai:.ir. tlioeoin. After a<?.,lil);;it or. 

tho momin'- in miestion in tlie course- of :J.s e. --oloyiout, 

a 

ho Txi.B p;oi2ig to tlio tool houoe '.Tel'dJig on^^P^ss: ^jcaton patJi- 
TTT-y "botwooH trades '"8" ana "9", in caici yard, ..Ticin lie 
vao fro:n ono Iituidrod to farce .'."anidrecl foot ( :,s ra ioiicly 
ostiiiated "by v;it2i9r;;r,oB) fro.; tlie to 1 laouco an Illinois 
ContrrJ, frqifjlit tr-aia of twenty loadeO. cars c/T/ro Ciied 
fron tho roar, nmiirig nort'-L^raa-d on t::.-.G3c "O", Appellee 
had to erosR thCvt trade to rc^clx t:io boo l^iouss. Tie e7.ciras 
that tho train sto-ppod ~h02i tho 'load of t:-.o o :3:lno "..-io '^rifint 
oven TTith Jiin; tliar a Gooriplioijo chont tv/o " ^imo lo (" fifty 
foot nor til af tho t.^ol "iotiso "vyn,.-- up as a ?.:imal for tivo 
train to atop, fi3ad th^^t uriiins i^stially i:to^>!}(iC. at dhont tlicA: 
placo in ohsdienoo to th t li^iifvl; lii t he c iclv. •■;" it 
was safer to crosr tracfc ''8" alioad of t|iis cfc..nuin;:^ trr.in 
than, to procood alon::^ this path ootv7eGn tr cJug =-n^' and ''9" 



.iiJ^'Sce',. r?o'Sj: £&Bv-<^A 



jlorrl-rr 



^}{3 iii ,s^f■.:;v.^^ -^i. ^EcQ: M^s^!' , , , :! 

s 
• _: isG;J .:>:..; :5^=^?^.jx , . I'urofi loot ojld' ©^ 31^1 

i/f.i-T:^ 3i?. ) ^os'i .^criB^im ®-:!(ira «* hatbtwai otto mo" 

sej'IsqqA , ■•■:;■ :£iu-ri{j- iio r3f2:s^'';J'Xo.K ^ctlr.iiira: ,■:: 
^.-rv; culr.;: ^' " ■ - '■■■■" -xc'.;-' au-) ■ 

'- :.Oi-- ; sd: i :w ; X,^:;l^^ x*:, ;? it? ocr 0aRS5JU5i©tfO fijt 

"C siu> .•'>:5}' izc \.,. oi njsflvi 



cuafl. cross noaror tlio tool lioti'-o 1>ccc.iirac x£ tlic .TfiLi Gi',?irtad 
wliilo h.0 T;aG i^iirtlier Tip ulio jatli lio ni-^at 3 t ca\i2;:ri.t ucfe/jon 
fchr.t aiod caxe rtanuin-]; on traclr "D"; tliat tlioi'ofovo Iio 
T7SjL3:od -ij) tills path r.bout •"cr/on foot in front o:? f 10 pilai; 
of tio cnglno ."md tarmio. to erosn tx'-o.oL: ^8" ahon wio en^i-^^'- 
sii3.oenly sto-i'tocl witAOut vramins* tliat "oof ore o eoixlu <;1 ar 
tiliG •E7icltli of tho train lio r.T'.n ctniei: and iajiirad "by tlio 
stop ^ t-io moTiii-; o;iginG. It tt^r [.rcrven aiid :iot c-orJ-cKi 
tliatf riile or ciicton of •r>ox-^tion in tvxiC. j/^rd rgfLtzirsd t-ho 
oii,';^inoor to givo two sliort • la-^^s of the v/iiiGtio bofc. o 
starti2i,5 Iiis 012.31110 imcTor sradi cirei-^nst'^aco;;; , Appolloe 
STzfforocl a conpouad fraxit-aro of tiio le^ sn5. v/as eonpelleS 
to TTallr mfeli erutelios for a'ooi-it a yaar, aiK?. at t .e tlvK; of 
tlic tibial x7-:iB uDinc; •"■- c'-no to asrjint liin, Tlis injur^r i.s 
pomanG-t, Ho rJLso elainod at tlio trial thnt ~-to h^t: <li:-Ky 
BUtflrs :r.olls, GS'-'Ocially izi lic-t T7cal-h.or, rcc-Jltl-ia- . r-07?i 
saio liijiiry that lis tJion ro'cired to Iii; l:.-2a5., ' Ho -5X'0- 
socutos tiliin ivCtion ruid.}r clu-rv^Gf: of eon on le.r; no ;;li.:;;oiaGC, 
not elOviainji tmdor aaiy federal or rttato statxito fixing; the 
liabilitjT of anplojT-ars. Ho li::A verdict 92\C: ^uix'-pxint a^.iizat 
"botli 'lofeci ants for J:;750» xron ■..v.icli jxLur-no.it tlioj'' prosof uto 
tils a;) /Gal, 

!iIhQ "principal miorvtion a^d t3io one -.ost o.rixofl in. tl^o 
"brief s is vr^iothor tlio a^.-i''onco sti-j orts t:ie verdijt, ip el .gg 
hinD.-^ilf tostifiG to t'io -'' ctt3 elrlror? b^ hi.vi, ^£ aboro 
stated, Zo v;lis ronovyli t 001^0 oratad "b;/ b./o otuiT T;it;i0C" of. , 
and Donev^ict oirjcref'ite-a "oy toBtiraoiiy tli t ::.o cvde ofeij:' ::"id 
difforont statoriontD .'^t ti^o tlrio ox tlio in.jiurv, ■2r...' 






■^Im^ 'yrAX: 



t- C =3ti 



■^-i; .»->ji,t"-i;.i5Jr, i: 



> ,-vJcc^ -2d' »-.^, 



ori^'inoar, fxrorian and TjraliGoan of 1£io train oach tcctii^iocl 
tliat it did not stop at t\?,t placo. Only tlao e ^rp-iiser 
saw apr:;olloo l;ofors 'te ns hit, Hg r:.::>^-n tliat Iio -.'/ae t }ii,3 
prop or pl':'.cc in tJio cab koopiii^ a lookout iii "ront o:^ t!io 
train on fcio right lia-:il. si do; t.'r.t ^o f ir^-iaa afid iioad 
Dralcoaaon wore on tlic other oxoo of t-uo 9^3^ loj'kliip^ i^ ."^rrrard ; 
that tliero rrc'.s an oAitomatic Ijoll on t'lo oiigino coritinaoiicsl;?- 
ringing; that ho fi'-st ^-'at? a:o lolloo tTalTin? hotrrosn tho 
trcc.iiE in a ylaco of r:afet7 qnito ;;. diataiiee rJKiad of tlio 
ongine; t'lr/c tzhesi tlio appro -cliin;? oiigino xrc-zi rritlvln. rbout 
tMrty-fivo foot frora c-.-rpollQo lio S'.icT-^^.only n top of. diroctly 
in front of tlio train ontracl- "8" —ittiotit Ijyokin^;'; tli t Iig 
inr.iodiatsl^r nonndod the "alarra T7?aistlo" fiYe oir sis: tiiort, 
sharp lilasts anl applioO t:?.o "brakon, but x/as -onaljlo to eto].) 
tho train and ap/olloo wan ntnicfe by tlie stop locatoC. on the 
loft Imnd oit'^o of tlio pilot of ';-io en^^ino Ovncl thro.m to tlao 
vide of tlio track; tko.t ^y:.o gnrjjjno ^.ad tvio ■•.-.ars passed "by Mra 
"bofo--e tiio train, isano to n stop, • Sliero arc i-jircraastcncc-r: 
croditi2i{? and diseroditing this tastL-orig?* Cko t.-ain v;. k 
moTing at sis or oin5it siil ^s sai hoiir. App0ll8o''n co:mr'ol 
say it is unrocso^blo to su 'pos^ tii t lio attc^ptod to ctosb 
t^-iirty-fivo foot ahoad of t o e:\7inG rnoying at t3i t f-tpeed 
and did not cucoe d in cl ?%r5jas tlio opceo. A,: 4iHtmts» 
coTmrol pay it io tmr'^acona Ic to ;■ -a'::\;:'Or-o t^-at tlia ^-a-ivy 
train vzhl.cli tjub dravm by r !33^^11 e-j;5i,ne nfcoppod an" sfe-rtoO 
again quick Qviour^i to catch r.v-elXeo if lie c ro rofl c,t a c"l- - 
taiioc of cfmcm foot. Bach oxi^ 'ODtion of i:iprohabilit;;' 

oooris to ns at least plaiisiilo. IIo 0110 o::copt ,.p jlle^^ na? 
tho tliroe train .•oai profosr. to 'caov/ eertai:ily v/hotlioi' I;;'!-; 
train r. topped; tliorefo -0, tho positivo t.^tstir.iony ^^^ tiiroo to 



rr 5/c» i-ss-mtl^ .•XOOltl^- o 






JS'S 



■:t Moo;- '^ svcL^yxb t:. rdfcXJtct 

i> s • V.:-^0"j:-- ry: 1;^ c^ 



DOO 



JIJtCTi 



ono tliat it aid not ctop. If it dif" not, ciicl. t'jio accicloiit 
lS''^PPG^otT ^■'--'^^ etcitod by tlio GELgjinocr, v/e o.o not ooo ojosr :^:i;iacl 
for rocovGi^'. It triis q qiiQ^tlon for tliu .''oz^, anC x'orf'icts 
are of tan pomitod to sttinfl, notr/it-isti^aixlirj.,]; a gi'or.tQr 
Tmcsber of T/itaef^sGn liavo toctJJTie'."^ ci^* iunt tlian for a au-jes- 
sary allegation of fact. 3tit often in smcIi oasoB tlio 
Biirroimding circTr-iSt;::acan Ghorn 1)^ tlio ovi nnoG leMr cup^poi't 
to tho iiOBtiiioi^ of t2iG ST.i?.llor rninibGr of •v7lt:iosc;or; and i-Pi?,]tG 
it soon more roa^oiiaolo to 'bGlioTO t!iGi:c GtatenGiitE tlrm t ■at 
of tho larger rnzr.iT>ar, V;e f^oo .-lot-Mn-j iii t l.'S I'ocoru oiitsic';o 
of tJiG direct l-c>atiT":0B;7 of tlxo r.i.t:iesooc: tii:t l;Iio train CicI 
and did not stop to nalio it noro raacona.'lG to ^^mamna th t 
it aid fhcm tJiat it di;" riot» -'e ^■•.ro of t'l? Q-jinion t'i .t tiao 
verdict is DO naMfsntl!^ a{T^i::i?:;t the msi^itt of t'le oTi ::Tif;0 
cs to ncilio it oiir d ity to rovorsio tlic j-.x^arrifi .t, ".'"o t}-Jji3i; 
too eiids of ;JTir:tico racuire t'lat tiio ori-o:v o cLonia lua Tlb- 
: lit ted to aaotlior .jury. 

/ippGllantG uxg'o tli:;t tm Torfll- t .io oxoesr.iTO. 
T/o rogu.rd it ^.tiite g largo :'S coxxJA lie por .it..5a fco ritarid 
if ths doferuiants Iiad pr:.::erly "been foiuicl guiltjr, con- 
nidoriruj tlio ago and oar.:dLnfj e-.p'.-cits?' of appolloe, fii5 tl:ii3 
Xn^ixrj saoTm "by tlio OTirenco* 

ApcGllanto offo-od a pex^enytory inr- traction -t t";.e 
cio^-^e of tho ovi fence, T^hich tho co^irt did no"; orr in rofiinin-:, 
Shey also offorod liine ot2i.r instruct ions, eac'i oi 'vjucli tho 
eoT3„t refusod* ctiG. q1c::-ot is horo DJr^aoO. c.c to '.'lo firrt fivG 
ot thoaa, Pourtoon inircnictionK wore f^ivon, au offoi-od by tho 



,dCT.Lrt;^-!-q;.:\ ^ 



^o'lilijtl 






tlo.foaaaatB, oscopt a sliglit modif ic: atioa in t\70 of tli3i;!, 
XTlilch xo not camplaiaGd of; .lul Doven i.'iistrn.ctiosrr: of- 
foro5 Ijy tlic lain tiff woro .^iiroii^ of w^dcii no coaiyiriat 
is macie, uq ULiItiIz tlia nocoe t^^jr stateiients of livj on- 
IjodioS in tlio rofusod i.iL^ti'iictions were i.-:ubst.ai3.tially 
ooTsrod "by tho inntiiictions glTron. 

A quesfcion is raised as to tlio form of t.ie vardict, 
"•Mdi rre no d not notice as it r/ill not occiir on anotir r 
trial. IIo o"bncctioa is r^cle to tlio rtGLin^ or^ tJie coirrt 
in tliG introduction of Qvinoneo, 

Por tliG roaGons al^oro ctatou the jiid^iont Ig re- 
TTorsod and tlio eaiico roaaaitlGd. 

Uoverfjecl and ronf?2iaeil# 



/' 



BUS CJX 

:4 -©i cufx&voo 



1X1 



STATE OF ILLINOIS, [ 

SECOND DISTRICT. I ^^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFFY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my liand and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



^.!5;1: ..;.'/ 



■'iU: 



■'I'i ' ' "f !' iii.'-.i'JT !(j /'-M.;.!:.' Lr.i.lMli 



!1K/' A;i;ll'=. 



■'i:j' 1:1.1 )1J 



.fl„ f.-,.l.(iwi: 




O''^ (^ 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 

/ 
Beg-un and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 

in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 

within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 

Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice. 

Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Just fee. 



CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clei^k.^^^' -_]. j J^A* H ?9 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. I 




%^ 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AUG I 9 1916 the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following-, to-wit: 



^st d^ruQl. OfJi ,. V' ■''?■& 8 et'T no fj8"'aJ-.tO i<s blod ban av^^ 
c ■."•r-:tft orf.'^' '■.i.; <;•■:: i: t J ?. f Q bnooeC sxlj lO'i 



[ I •- :.?■" :J7i?oD Slit i:; aotnlqc srlt 



Gon, ITo. 6302, 



Appollant, ) 



LA3CS POIOilSiD V/ATDR CO., 



) 
) 

Appellee. ) 



Appoal .-Crom Lalro, 



CAH11ES» J. 






lill 



njnjji^g by Pinley Barrell, tlPrrrp-rrgr^rfmi , a-- J.nBt Lake Poroat 
V/ator Co., :v public seivice ooip oration, -^ilu^ , LpY'dlft-'^' i t;o 



:r^ 



restraiai it from sliitttinc off tho v.ater on sa^ii-, ruCa^J^ 

p-emioQE Ibocause of Jiis failure aiad refusal to ai-y a Ijill 

rendered for water fur/d-s'ied in tlie r-.ontlis of Jnly,Aii"a:::ty 

and ;-3Gpt0mber, 1913, "■llaged to groa.tly oscoed the a;;;qmit 

lio Jiad tised in t}ia.t ^oeriod. ftSliore vras a prior Iioarinr; ^ 

A " ( 

on a motion to dissolve tliin sa-Tio in.i-anetion in v;iiicli tlio ^ 

motion xTar allo'.ved and appoal to this court by the ■ \rater - 

company. XIq roverBod tho order overnilinfj the r.iotion to 

dissolve ojnC. remanded the o-aiise for another 'v ax''in3 on that 

motion. <?«*: opinion jbs^ reported ( not in fxill ) in 191 



... App, 269. J 



111 

procodixre on motions 
such, motions should be 1 



b the Dt tutoo governing the 
feo2ivs an injunction, and raid 
and detorminod upon ti:.- weirh- 



of the testinony intrioduc 




the rccoo'tivc oartios at 



-T- 



.SOSa ,cTi ^no'j 



ji'mi\E Ys.imi% 



[ 



{ nO^tLOitii- 



• 'J « ' ■ 

. ,arfd xs.t fiesr ^■ 



^i I «<?3?. ,qc 



Tiyi,: ^>:li^Xfi70Vi aod\r;-: .-ri cxl;f Oo, :rx aW \ «<?3S ♦qqA *III 



the hoaring; tli:.t the comploluant introduced no evi- evt.; e 
and in our opinion the riaterial alJ.e,^^tions of fact in the 
sT7orn Ijill vroro raet and oTGrliorne "by the ansTzer under oath 
and affidavits road in support thereof bj the defendant; 
that the record, as pi/CGenteci. , indicated tloat the water 
meters were correct; and correctly read; and that sta,tements 
of the complainant th t ho did :iot use so much water 'witlioiit 
any shoxTing as to the oasis of such statements vfere of littlo 
probative value. We suggested that the f.cts ar.d circum- 
stances as to the use of Trater on tlie jprenises night be s ovrn.\ 
that thore migiit have been a TiTasto of •';7ater through the 
iieglect of servants or\ acme der"'ect in the pipe, and ua.:,t evi- 
dence negativing such a loss or waste shoiild oe offered bei? 
fore Oil injunction should be perriitted to rstand. In siort, 
as "ihe record then ctood, thore .vas little, if s-jiy, reliable 
< reii^arniMHw-My evidenOe as to the amoxmt of water used except 
tliat furnished by reading of the meters and prima f .cie evi- 
dence that che meters were accurate. 

It is sug ested by counsel that we we:e understood 
to say that the case depe2ifl.ed entirely upon evic^ence as to 
the mechanical condition of the meters, and tixat tZae in- 
junction should be dissolveiS. unless a test naCe on the raoters 
themselves showed they were ina.ccurate. Ho such conclu.sion 
was intended. The sug-;estions in the opinion above noted 
indicate that we were then of the. opinion that evicen: e other 
than of the mechanical construction and worhing of the 
meters might be furnished and 'should be furnished if the 
injmiction v;as permitted to stanc! , \ On reinstateme.Lit of tho 

-2- 



;■ i-; .-.e Oil hQtiSji>oi;ial d-nxaiJ ; iitxieGri edA 

Tsisv ar(j ifac!^ .5o^.r.ox5r;x , 5od"r , ':'iooet efrij ji^nd" 

rsHivr TSJfaw luoirrs ob ©sjx dorr bI^ srI i^mU liaJsalsZqmco erlA ^c 

.ox;Xev evicfcrfO'xr 



. Diia iioxcroiiu(,xiJ: its ©io± 

CI ^cf -oerlExiiiiri (tadJ 



-■Ye t-rlrl /t^ini:.. 



■" n-' ''t'ods noldnrrr-' 
. oEUTOdTll S.CT7 

. . ..u dd^Jtm 8'3:o;JoiTi 
licrtocr aav/ xioldomxf.xij: 



casG other afCldavits worG i-oad covering; the siigrjestions 

fouiid in the opinion and indie s. ting a sharp controversy 

as to many material facts. p rooontijig a caoo wliei - o there — 

r hQil3A--be--er-£fca£ar-i» eai ' ing of t a > e e vi4 ea3C-e_!?j.t2L-.Qpjimiliiiiiitg---— ■ 

tg ciTOsn ft^eaCTiTTe-^iartrTJT'SITesseS^^ - -iit5-te3?m43aiaas.~.lilio 

m& ^ t-fi .■ af„ ... l ; .i ae''gpnt ^''ova ' 3 ? e-y-» She cjiestion laefo -a tho trial 

court on this motion wrs v/hether tho statue quo should be 

maintained pending fe agett hcarin!^, 

^ -J 

\ / 

In Psteton v Pahry, 111. App, — -, t7o revier/ed 

and discussed the oai thorities on th.e duty of the chancellor 

on the hearing of\a motion to grant or dissolve a temporary 

I injimctlon. The statute provid.es for a hearing on such 

\ 
/■motions and rfiiether aVtemporary injunction should be granted, 

lor, if granted, should remain, in force depends upon eviclen. e 

produced at hat hearing,\ /Sut, as vie pointed out in that 



/' 

/ 



case, it is not a hearing 0b. the merits, and whether the 

I ststus quo chall he orcsorvedx by the granting or continuance 

I of a temporary injunctijxn depei^^s not only upon the probabil- 
i made / 

ity of the case/on s^ch a hearl^ng, but a.lso upon the relative 

/ \ 

injury thr.t mia:ht be/sustained by '^he parties by the action 

of tiie chancellor i;l granting or rei^asing a temporary in- 
junction contrary, /bo what might be fo\pd on a final hearing 
to be the nerits/of the c ;se» 

/ 

T" ■■- - ■ -oresent case tlie allegati\ms of the bill 
-/^ \ and aiasv/er Luid -.j-fidavit evidence in supports and denial 

thereof requj^ring a hearing on the merits and tS;^e prcliiLinaiy 

/ 

/ \ ^, 

-3- 



jSXtDxi'ae^iigU'B GiSa -^GliiT^^vof) Bsei e-^pw a J iv:^. £4 -..'its 'isxIJo oaso 






& 



-IVS'I OV7 



"^^s^ogised 3 stIv 



9 jsoqir 3&;.; 






.' : -rsisim s^sica o;t_a6 

. ii^Kj xBd'Hisra 

and Bs8aiT08x.5 Bn^j 
"pjiixjssri Slid" rto 
.rroxd'f:»nir{;iil 1 

/j3 Booirfioiq ( \ 
r Iljsds o/rp aufed'a '■ 

■ do TjixrQKi 
.-: loXXoactGrip erfct lo 
'xdrroo aoliomsl i 



f 



^•aj! 



yii.:: iO\/rtj 



- ; > 



'-•••port loetrexfd 



in.jimetion only serving the piirioose of raaintaiiiing the status 
quo pendin^j that lioarinjj, it •;70-uld seom tliat little losa v/oulc 
"be siistainea "by appellant in vironr^f-allj maintaining tlio 
present condition oonpared with ibhat izhich v/oiilQ Ijo dustained 
"by appellee in '.Trongfully euttinrr ofl' his water eiipply during 
that period. 

Vie are therefore of the opinion that the court erred 
in its order dissolving the injunction. Chat order is re- 
verse o. 

Reversed, 



-4- 



STATE OF ILLINOIS. | _ 

SECOND DISTRICT. \ ^^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFPY. Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 
and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing' is a true copy of the opinion of the 
said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my ofBce. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and aflQx the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this _ 

day of in the year of our Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Ooxirt. 



-n 






III" r -r.Wil 



n 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, 

Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 

Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 
> Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justipe. 



Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, JustiSj§- 
CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerlf. 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. I 



A4 ^ 




^>>*w»**^'' 



BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 

AU6 1 191C the opinion of the Court was filed in 
the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and figures 
following, to-wit: 



? T r + V I- •p.rr i fc i 3 $ "x ^" ? 8 UABS I Jo' ■ K 

,9 0i^?;jC .JJ^SIC 30F:fAilHOG . noH 

,^iiv;r(a ,8ivAa .M .a 



:Jtw-oJ f^niw. 



Gon, Ho, 6£62. 



J. 3, Pickens, 

\ppelloe, 
-vs- Appeal from Eaalcakoe, 

Citj of ZanlsalieG, 

Appellant. 

DIBELL, J. 

J.S.Pid'i^ens.fGll into a liolo in a mi"blic str§/5 . o 

city of }Caiiks,Icd<? at about elTsven o'cloclr at ni^it on Jtily 4, 

1915, and entruck ^s left knee and otlier pa/ts of his left log 

against a wa-ter pipe'Vnd a f-.ticot tiiereojl in said hole, ozid.. 

was injured threljy, andsbrougiit t:isy^ult a.i^ainst tl^.e elty of 

Eanlrakee, the Kankakee Wat^ Work^ and I'red Herscher to reeove: 

\ / 
damages for said Injiirios, ^eifbro the trial he disraissed the 

suit as to defendant, Zonkake'e ^^ter V.'orks^ At the close of 



ll^e 



n 



tho trial a verdict was djy^ected fd^ the dofeiicant, Herscher, 

Shore v/as a Terdict ageJmst the cit^ of Xankakeo for two 

/ 
thousand dollars. A/motion for a new ts^ial was denied. 

Plaintiff haa Judgrrfent and tlie city prosec\tes this appeal. 

It 4«- contended th t plaintiff Gasiae-^ro cover he cause 
the notices filed by him with the city clerk and with tjie 
city attorney did not contain the address of the attending 
physician, as ss: required by trio ntatute relating to such notices, 
In that res ect the notices said: " 'Dhat Dr. J.A.G-uertin waj; 
the attending physician, and -that he called in 33r. C. G-# Snith 
to exa'nine the in,iurieG." It wa:: oroved th:.t at tlic time j 



-1- 



'\di.-. ... - .;iOv 



^ o 02ije3fe£ai ISO?;!,. l.SQ<i'^A -:jV- 

.d-xiJ3ll8qc[A 

ofid' lux ;^s©'Si)a oiXdirq- a ix.t olorl s odrd: II o5:,8xi0^ox':i, 2, "& 

/ 

\ / 



,tarios'xeH ,i£i&b£^'i&b en^ ^3: Botfoe^^^lB 8^" .^r a Ifsxid' ori* 

,J?e.l:£S5.o i3£;w IbI.^ wexr b. to^ iicid'OfflNA. .BisIIof)" ^nsaxroiid- 
♦l3-'-qf.s alri* set/^saorj^j^i-io GiSt Bna ifi-sirgBirt Serf 111 ^nxBlg: 

6»3|j dilYi fv^iB ^E-iSlo -^d-xo 9jrr;f rfiJIw inxxi: -^ belli BooJLion. edi 

■3nx3Ae*d.(i odi 'io aso'r&^.Q ©f{^ al&ittoo ion bib -r^moiis "^d'io 

re iniff:^ oy- -PA"!-- file's aJJ3o,ft;?e oxii}-. tjcT J&©ixj;pen: ass: ss ,riBxo±8^rfq 

• n'ii'^i.^j,;:,!- .Ill rt-^rr^ " cTx/.r; auol^ton: extt *ooc:aoT cferf* rcl 

;.:ictC: ,v ,Q .Id ni. .xzjjxola-^rdjj ^nxSxse^d'fl edi 



c 



of the accident Dr. J. A. Guertin held the official position 
■under the city of Zaniiakee of city physician and that there 
was no other Dr. J. A. Guertin in that city at that tine, 
1 Wo 00 nc lud t ! LIiiTt -nnM-gTHy3ie--B/inci-ple&--laird.- dew^ vs 



^ Cl 



ty of Chicago, 263 
in that respect, '7e 
fioers of the city 
and "by the exercise 
anjr fact for v/hici 



10, the notices were sufficient 
st assumo that the executive of- 
!W trtG r.-.sioenoo of the city physician, 
f reasonable diligence could ascertain 
resort to theVat tending ph,7siGian T7as neces- 



It s»> urged th.:-t certain opinions ezpressed "bj the 

witness. Dr. Greerman, were incompetent he cause they we e 

based upon suojective symptoms. Dr. Guertin attended the • 

plaintiff until he wentaF7ay on 'lis vacation, and he left 

directions with the plaintiff to go to Dr.Bromi in his absence 

and the plaintiff did go to Dr. Brown, but he also went to Dr. 

for treatment; 
(Jreenniaiy^ and Dr,3roT;n made a. thorough examination and treated 

the. patient, and the plaintiff then went to Dr.Greenman and 

was treated by him twelve or fourteen ti:.ies thereafter 



<i 



J 



rteiaa -feweia ea:-iir??^Tlr"nT)on-sub^jei3 tire- s ^mp- 



toms, the laiowledge oTJssj/hicii X 
ourinrr his treatment of 



erived Hj the phydician 
-atient are com-ootent. West 



Chiea St.R.H.Co., va--'Carr, IVCKi;;!!. 478; Greinifce vs Chicago 
\ Co., S51 jIS. 5( 



G iv.,- Ry. Oo i i, g54 . ,K i l , . i 56A ajft a oaooo -g agyg' i 5it!J4 « Y'his 

suit ]i'd been "b^gon befp e the plaintiff went to Dr.Greenman, 

/■ 
i-^ mugt be th;~.t he intended to call Dr. 

Greenman as a witnesjzrNend t'lat in reality the ezamiimtion 

Kust have been for/t e purpose of qualifying him as a witness,* 



and It is. argued 



-E- 



■:3 0o; Isioxllo &d'i bled jcii^'iei;© .A <t .id ^xieJoiooB e:ii J.o 1 

dnoxoiliira ©isw 8«»ox*on; edi ,013^ ,1^ S6S ^ogBoxifG lo -^xO l-^ 
,itsio 'xo exld- So ©Qne&xaei and w^ittsL \iiJXO edi lo a-reolj: 

-85 09X1 as'!! n.&iQiaxdq -^.aixmoi' ■. . --as 

■ :■. . *"-^v^' 



Jucf ..':■ . 0- 5i"; 



.11 e.-:/;, ^ftr-i;c6'i-0 



• :X©f{d 8: ..-d ffllxf -^cf fied-js. 

:-:s:lb-%dq edit ■^" MyirteDNj,?: rTn 'xfw,^ e'sJ&elwoxt: , ::rod' '^> 

•^- .dxi9cl-aqnrco qib drco-t. • lo d-asEd-Jseid- aid sex-; 

V ©3taxe-x€i ;8V:^ .iiplSvi ^-x-tb^v ,.oO.H.H.da o eoxxIO 

. :. .:£C£ oi^.dneT/ a-1.. rxescf J&rj[ *iua 

so 04 ^erte«»Xil od i^di enf i: --.z^jsi il £rx3 . 

>TtJtiI :?^.xj. :oecr 9VBx£ dairrji 



The QYVlencQ is all to tlie contrary a.ni^'CAat ijosition finds 
no siipportN^ce 't in tlie : act tha^^Dr.Grreeiman was eal'ecT as z 
witness. It was natural tl^ja't the aifi^erent 'phjrsicians at- 
tending the plaintiNi^^ gilOTLid lie ensiled as T/itnesses. [Dho 
witness vras not di^<iiia!l:ified from giving his opinion foiinded 
on sul)joctiye,,.'^yinptoms "bj t!h>ei^ere fact that c£tev iiaving' 
treated ^"e patient Tor so le tioNjie iDecane a witness In 'lis 
■behalf^ 

The injiiiy occtirred luitlor the following cii'ciir-istances 
There was in-ZanhoJree a puhlic park imo^in as Electric Park iii 
or near the southeastorly psrt of tlie city of Xanlsi::ee, It 
was reachecl "by Os'bom Ivenuo, a ptihlic street of said cit^r, 
Inhere vtc^tq nine or ton thousand people at said park in the 
eveninij of July 4, 191S. The crowd started to leave the po.rk 
to go "back to the citjr at 10;40 p. m# The str et car line 

entered Oshorn Avenue at its south end and went north for 
sone falocks, and thence hy different directions to the center 
of the city, ',7hon the crowd re: ched the street car line 

it was found that the rumiin.;; of the street cars was tcapora- 
rily suspended for some reason not explained. Thereupon, 
sorao tliroe or jl'our thousaiid people started to •^llc hack into 
the city, going north on Oshorn Avenue, Plaintiff ano. 

his wife haxL spent the evening in the park and were a ong wio: e 
walking back. The south end of OslDorn Avenue v;as in an un- 
finished condition. There wrs no sidewalk on either sio. e. 
The strco^ car track was in the midu.le ox t?iO street, f::jia there 
was a place iJrraveled "by teams oast of tlie street oar track, and 
uaet of that some grass, and east of th t a place v^iere the 



oo:iyj>:'ve zu 






:^^i©i:d•^•.q «^ Mi&&r£^ 

rx s eo^IaTlflbeS • Jji asw. eiori: 
".-.i'oa edi 



, Lti: enios. 



J. _ -r 



s.'.dewalk r/ould ultimately Tdg laid. Tuqtq xtqtc also tolepliono 

poles an'"! -TGrliaps sone other ob struct ions 'betv/een tlio place ~iiere 
the veliicles traveled aiid tlie place -Tliere the sideT/alk ■voiild be. 
Plaintifig and Ms irifo traveled alon^- the street car traeh. 
When they rea.c ed a place soineT7here iiear the center of a Dlocik 
they saw on the east side of t :e street that there -.vas a sider/alk 
from thero north, and that some of t le people traveling in t^io 
street had gone over to aaid vrero r/alkin^: upon that sidoxTalk. 
Thereupon plaint! f.' and his vjife tiLrned and went to -ards the . 
sidewalk for the purpose of getting out of tlie street car track 
and out of the piece where the vehicles ns.turally v:ent, and getting 
upon the sidewalk 8,nd over to tSie place for pedestrians. Li^here 

was no cur3i and there ■was no parking in the ordinary sense of 
th t term, hut as they passed from the place where the wheeled 
vehicles har" heenjthoy went upon the grass on the sa e lervel 
until they had almost reached the sidewalk. Eaere v.'as in the 
ground, not far from the sidewalk, a hole three feet wi^e cmd from 
four to eighteen inches deep, accordi:i': to the varying tnstimoay 
of different \7itnor:ses; and up .from to center of th...t hole 
came an iron pipe, and on the top of the pipe a fow ine]-os aoove th" 
ordinary level of the ground -..as a faucet. Plaintiff fell 
into this hole and struck his loiee against the iron pipe or 
faucet, and v; s seriously inju ed. Some witno see placed this 

hole at one foot from the sidewalk, and others at tio feet, Irat 
plaintiff testified that as he fell, ho fell with his faca on the 
sidewalk, ^ rhieh • i - Micjv'fe e o - feho-t he wag-"Correcrt--T:«r --gfitrir' Y..v 
- it was gloaa tn ^. - e gJ cl ewaJJiL. Shis hole hcd "been tlierc -or 
more than two months and a half in substantially the same con- 
^ dition, St ) b'^.t I ' lm < j i t!^ muSti ""iTg' [li ' U k sm r ' '- "' ■ ' .:>t-i.'i-G_.- .„,,. 

— ^ -4- 






bi^l99d\: 



. -..^..^„c-. Olid- 
J.U*..: '^ ' ' "•'^■> :<.':.swo-&xa 

■ rid 
,c:iu IxcJtuj 

xo 

i-j.5iO 

■ .•=! 
:orf 






C4\ 



/ Plaint if i' did not iniov? of its osigteiTco.a.::.'.d tiae night ..as dc-rl-r, 
I c^ii r, ni tv <7(7];||, P!r|n p -^i^ ■ '■ - ' ^- 37&G not botjjid to exercise rcasonsblo 
\ i caro to keep that plad^S}^ ^ e. rec.sonably safe condition for foot 
travelers, and tliat thiereXpi-e the instructions which infomod 
the Jury pf the du^ of ±k jKcity in relation to its streets 
^i£iriL_iE»*»»rT^^ Maintiff and his ''■vi::o turned to .go iipon t.he 
Biclewalk from the celKiter of the street sdon after they imd passed 
f the south end of the siodovj-allr as actually laid, and ;7e thinlc that 
I the ■ ity ini^t reanon^^hlyXexpect t;ij;/t persons going along that 
street from the south wo^ildNjalre yK'he traveled way in the center 
of the stroet until they reachM a p3.ace T/here there fras a 
I side\7allr. anc^ ivould then turii to f»j^ uponthe sidewalk; and th?.t 
the .jury might reasonably find that\t ^7as not a lack of ordinar/ 
care for the plaintiff to- go ■57here he d>aJ. uruler the circirastances 
shoiTn in the .ovi"'ence. ,' Che instnj.ctioiis\n regard to the clutj?- 
of a city concerning /its streets ■';7oro stock i^trufitions \7hich 
have been many times approved by the courts, ".Tesare of 
opinion th" t a cause of action .as shovm ard. th t noting \7as 
shovai that had -any tenuency to defeat it, 

of plaintiff vras in a certain contracting business in Uatsoka, 
A branch of th; t business had beeii opened in Eanka'ioe, a.ricl 
plaintiff v/as in chrge thereof, anci apparently in p rtnership v/ith 
his father. He recei-ed certain v.'ages p.>r \7eek, cM in afi'-if-on 
thereto fifty er cent of the profits mare upon the Kanla:v;:ee j 

-5- 



ai2 erf- eoi'it. 






^ 



:od^oo erf:? rrort alXsWe^xs 

::t fltcnrl- d-e^rriJ'a ' 

J- Join 0^.7 fix£j? .-irXiswoibxc 

{ 
» -o.dxi.";}- ill cwoifg / 

VXUSEt JttOSrf OV-Grf 

;t ?rrd rmoda 









"business^ and Iig tcstiflscLb and it is& not disputed, tlia prior 
to this r,cc:'-dent lie vtcs apjsiiii^ 01800,00 por year. The injury 
produeec an inflanation of the imier lining of ':2ie kneo joint. 
He siiffered great pain and nnich of the time was imaolo to us^e 
that Im©© as ■asually required in the actire duties of his 
business. He r;as laid up for a certain length of tine; ha^ 
TTallred 'With a cane and -^ .aolo to TTsHi: Tjut litale wi tout a cane. 
He has "been ahlo to figure on contracts hut not to erforn the 
active daily services for \7hicli ho fOiTierly had ''oqhu 'oaid^ 
and since tMt time he has heen ahle to male on3iy §400, or (-.500, 
per year, A>»eo railig Hyo ' fr ? TB'- e' >* »«^^a&-»~M'9---'^l&s-g--^^"t»ft-3:rQin,gs 
heforo th n l ii r' r i ^-^ --- fihn \^r' \ r { \ f ?7Cf tno'"'f >fi th? Yrriili— '^"t .•Je iMB. vv-c 
likely to recover the cpmplete use of t'le loiee in time. The 
city Tjrou^it proof tending to s'low that he had heon seen riding 
a "bicycle. He do iod le h d ridden a hicycle, She city 
offered iTitnecfies uho had ser.n him v.^alk vXiien they did viot thinir 
he used a cane, lie testified that on some of the occasions 
they na'-ed he did use a cane, and tiliat he v/alhed very little 
without a cane. She in.juries he suffered vrere not merely to 
the Imee "but related to the rrhole of the ;Lef t leg, | sThcn tho ■ - 



loss f earnings, anvTshis jpain ai)fl. suf.-'ering.and the hills of his 
physicians and his otho^eioeneos for sickness to rf/ilcli he 
t. stifled are conside:.ed, ^^^ae unahle to say that the vordict 
is too lL-r:;e, It is tru/© th::iK the extent of plaintiff's in- 
juries largely dependsyupon his c5v)tL statement of tlio pain fflid 
suffering and of his/inahility to valSs. and to perform the 
ordinaiy duties of 'his calling hecause 03\this injury. It is 

-5- 



^aa9nlaJ^cr 



:ol3jja oS 



BaorflarJ 



ids xie ' .oXo'v'joicr s 



, ■ 3561 

a£ri9<ToB vJCo^aibI adixtrt 



j true tliat he may he misrepresenting tlie extent of liis injuries 
; to the jurj/-, "but the^^ oelieved Ms testimony aM tlie trial jud^-e 
I has approved it, and nost of life sta,te;nents as to his pa±i and 
f suffering and the effects upon his enployaent are e^rpressly 
testified to hj him, and are not disputed hy anj^" other witness 
in the case. Under all the^e circiirnstances \-;e cansaot say hat 
the judgment is escessive, 

The court gave eight instructions for the plaintiff ano. 
we consi" er them to he stibstantially a correct statement of the 
law, The court g;j.ve siEteen instructions as offered hy the de- 
fen ant,' and slightly modified and- gave smother instruction for 
defendant, and th»se instructions fully state the la,w favorahle 
to defencant. 2he court refused eleven instnic- bions requested. 
"by the clefencant hut so far as they v/ere com'oetent , they v/ere 

/ emhodieS in the instructions -j-ven. Too or three of t..iem '//ere 
I 

I 

Z^j so involved that they might reasonaoly have oeen refused on t'-at 
,' ground. 'Je are of opinion that the jiiry \7exe sufficiently and 
corretly instructed. Finding no reversihle error in the record 
the judgment is therefore affirr.ied. 

Af f irme d. 



/ 



-7- 



■ i;..-±i:f exlw Ms •^oi;..L- "'— ':':9cf ^xl^ d-xroT ,^xrt o^^ '^^i" 

itsq 3xjf od' SB ad-ne "" ' ■" " ^^^'^ ----'■- ■ -- 

n-:0r:Ji:w Taajo Tpia '^d" ''■-■--- .^ - 5 ^j-on c~:- ^■■^■- ,ui.i.i v,u Oj .e^.H^aoi ; 

''''■'■' . ■ ■■ ■ J. '' 

9^9w Tj6ji* jd-ns-d'scfinoo ©tiew Tgexf-^ ^-i -xs?: oa dxrcf ^xiB5noi95 edrf x^ . '" 

3'ievr medi lo estM %q owT .nerr-, ynoidoirco ani srfd nJ: BexJ6oGixae > 

1 
1 
no 'jQesften rreecr svarf %Irfi3n:oB.s9i d'xi^ixii ^4d- d'sxLd' fievlcvnx os I J^ 

v:Idi.-sxox5:lir8 9197? -sj^xj-q edi ds^* nolrtJtoro !!:o ai« eW .toirorrg \ 

'-::/ :rd ni tco-xt:© elrfisi©-?©'.!: on g^ciiixti , .-^oiT^dBicl •^Ideiioo 



STATE OP ILLINOIS, ) 

SECOND DISTRICT. i ^^' I, CHRISTOPHER C. DuFPY, Clerk of the Appellate 

Court, in and for said Second District of the State of Illinois, and keeper of the Records 

and Seal thereof, do hereby certify that the foregoing- is a true copy of the opinion of the 

said Appellate Court in the above entitled cause, of record in my office. 

In Testimony Whereof, I hereunto set my band and affix the 

seal of the said Appellate Court, at Ottawa, this 

day of in the year of oui' Lord one 

thousand nine hundred and 



Clerk of the Appellate Court. 



>■•■ :' bur. ... li.nii' ; 1^ ■ _; . . 



<■■:■)' -)i!.r .V, 



G ^ 



^"" ■"'. 



/ )f X ' 



',/ 



AT A TERM OF THE APPELLATE COURT, ^'-^^^ J 



Begun and held at Ottawa, on Tuesday, the fourth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, 
within and for the Second District of the State of Illinois: 
Present--The Hon. JOHN M. NIEHAUS, Presiding- Justice. 
Hon. DUANE J. CARNES, Justice. . 
Hon. DORRANCE DIBELL, Justice. ^ Q Q "'" " 



CHRISTOPHER C. DUFFY, Clerk. I 

B 
E. M. DAVIS, Sheriff. | 






iD3 



# 



\ 

BE IT REMEMBERED, that afterwards, to-wit: on 
^..^ ^ ...,- the opinion of the Court was filed in 

the Clerk's office of said Court, in the words and fig-ares 

following, to-wit: 



■' -; r! 3 to .' c J T,v J: I U be; 



n-: 






;■ V, ■ o.:^ - ^,.': ;■: ':w. v 
0' ;:Io jo noini 



Appeal frorr- Co. Ct» P?oria. 



Gen. No. 6301. 

Jeunnette E. Lewis, Aimx. etc. 
appellant, 
vo 
Ksw Amsterdam Casualty Coinpany, 

appellae. 
DlbsU, J. 

^^^ era 

of- Thon-n H 5t— btr?n:-g7- JLeocaag-l | u«e»-a hei-^-ith -i.n I life 
int)ur.ance policy i^:;uei by 5 . p;^s: J e c to Thorrcv.D E. LeTris on 
June 39, 1914, Lewia 'ho-b tai;en ill xn Au^uat 19l'i, inA 1iel 
on March 15, 1515. Hi-^- '-lTb ^Jb C-i. Tit; t j x i suu i' fi^t - an ri-^ gou gb t — 
t ^l- a -^ . ui i , ■ j . G ^uoh . 71>e policy proviici r^'or iick "osn'^-flts of 
^35 per w"ek. Ko eiok Denefits were paid. Thare ras an a - 
propriute .iecla.ration upon tr.e policy. Cert^-in picas were 
filed, to '.vhioh a jemurrer ^as auiitained, ind csrtain other 
pleaa were tl^en filed u,; on v?hich iis^ue v7as joined. The 
pleas were eu,ch in oz^t , exce,. t is to ^,"^19.73 tsn ler ir.ais be- 
fore suit. Tbs riret plea, .v^^a tr.e quj^lified .^en'rs.! iaeue. 
The ran-iaininf; pleas '.vers that tlie a plio^.tion ^mB ■:.!& t. 
pert or the policy, '■^nl V'aat the policy Tvas iasusJ u,-on "-he 
considoration of tV.e jTsiTiiiim t-nd the .=- tat amenta in the ap- 
plication, an JL various ut.^teTent8 in the application 
as to the gocd "lealth of Levris «ere ignisl. Scecit-l rap- 
lica-tione 'vere filei to the a.-^ciii-l pl^a-a, ani is-'iuea wsrt 
joined u. on 3c!.ii replications* TUX.-thei'-e'-MTg.B n trial -^T»" 

anX ii-t the clo\je of ail the ^iisnce th-^pourt inetruotel 
the ^rv to return a veriaKst for ,:ef en Ja-nt, \anj' such ver iict 
was ryt^irnod, >^n j £.\>cir'icn or a ne.- trial ^asV denic-J, and 
tliQj/e '.f a\ :a juigmap^ iiK^r.r against th€s.'plaintiff\ and 

to proucogt G jynij a;peg.i^^hgrof r c a .. 

The parties) lived in P?^oria. George Reagan was af^ent of / 



*X8Sd .oK .n^O 

• tnjBXIaqi*; 
.«iTOP<? .*D .oC ajo*r'^ X£;a . A av 

^^ia£q!uo0 Y^XjsiiaxiO ntfitisJ-emA wsH 

no Bi*9J .2 a^iTsorTT od- .#«44r®4^^ Y^ l-susel ^o2Xoq eon^Tu/Qni 

£sir Ltifi ,i^lSX ^au-guA ni iii n&,)lsi bj5»' eiwsJ .t^xex ^GS erufL 

— i^5^b»e're-irffii *|>*-*tfosrx^™»mBT5^t^^ .5ISX ^SX rioiwl no 

*o 8*2t«*ri90' iois lo^L l^stAVCsq ^oiXoq bcCT ,4 ouc o .» s JEu a s k sj i 

STS^ si:slq atsiia'O .xolloq srLt aoqir aoiitjertijXosJr. aJjjXaqoiq 

QdT .JtenioQ Sijw di/sei xfeiriw aoqM JbeXi'i nsJi stsw a&slq 

-acf otjsffi leinrsj- E^,8X| o* ejs d-qsoxs ,iac( ni rfo^s 9T©« e^sXq 

.eu8Ei X^asrtss tsiliX-sjjp srU s^w ^eXq i'arsll eriT ,iiue eiol 

A et-^ti aa'e aoiit'AcxXq.:^ srf.t #isd:f siaw ajesXq 3ninX£.T.ei sdT 

srf-" iX0Ci.i/ isu£ri a.sw ^OiXoq »rf^ *Arf:' f rr*; ^Y.olloq Qiii :o i"Tt^q 

no is:^t> II'-' oji si'ii ni oiascpQ^^ii: ^uoliav xa£ .noiicoiXq 

-qe? i--:ios'-,2 .le ]:«&;_ s-td« alwsJ 'iu rlitX-asi:^ fcoos 3"* o<^ Bs 

-»i9w eei/c&i ifli- .a^sslq X-'5io8-:6 arf.-t ocf i:si:il otsv,- &noiii,oll 

iT'^ T<^"X3='2'Yy~2rTtt:*^ -®«4Mii. Jjir ♦anox^f-ioiiqsi ii^e ao.M Xeaiot 

t3d-^ijT:r^ni iTuoVs^-^^ dOii®Xii»^ sri} IX^ lo e^oXo ad:f 1-3 i^nis 

lvi£. ,fc5lnsi/aj6*. XjaiT;f :>9a a to" rroiXospr 3 in£ ^ienix^'x ejbw 
rar- X^^itnX-Xq-acf ' *oai^-,v; a/.d/fii Jt^ingiut ^ >6£W sScpd^ 



"c^U^jr -.-J^ *• '--'-'^' 



V 



utipcj-t ee -.t ?-3oria, xni taia policy '^rao issued :.'rom i^is 
o- :ice upon in a;^'-lioation brought to hirrby C, TC, Gsriea, iio 
was silsc a life inauranee ;.-:3nt. L-2:vi3 a:ir«li3i to Gc-ries 
for aca.lth c.n'i...li'fe in:.urLi.nce, -v. i -lerlcs a)piie.i to Rea3;-,n, 
Apparently Ger iea prepared a first iraCt of -n -^ ::linatioi* 
an.i tV;is a-ppi ication .vhioh r/aa grc^nted, vaa ir r^at ATlttsn 
30 far aa ths typewriter parts -vore ooncerr.ed, ( -/"nicii cere 
ta3 ones tlxat it cvaa oliiinai v.ere untrue), in ?\ea;3an*a o .Cics 
and by his ^enofenpher, by Rs-t'an's direction, and .loiiv- 
ered to Gerdee. It i«- cl rained ' 'uat this '-implication waa 
f raudulen t . T^-va-r s - l&,-aa-. p r fc ii -^g£:_j55:t" e-xeegfe— by .inf.ersnea-.. - 
Gerdsa aigiied Lswis' ni-n e bo tne applioation. Lrtwis n?,v.;r 
saw it. Geriee testifiei '•at ho oon^^.l dgred hlmjeif 
authorized to sign Lewie* n; aie to it. Gerisa t- t^ti'isd 
that he took the 3tate rents ..vQ to V.\e. ccnliticn o"^ h::xlth ox 
Liv.is i.'roni applications -rhich TaCSiis had rcxde to hin: .3cr:s years 
before. Gerdes denied .ny kn: wledge of *he '^':■.eta ooncerninf- 
Lewia* c:oniiticn of 'le • 1th whic