City of Virden v. Doyle

Appellate Court of Illinois

City of Virden v. Doyle

123 Ill. App. 52, 1905 Ill. App. LEXIS 715

DecidedOctober 9, 1905

StatusPublished

This text of 123 Ill. App. 52 (City of Virden v. Doyle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Virden v. Doyle, 123 Ill. App. 52, 1905 Ill. App. LEXIS 715 (Ill. Ct. App. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice G-est

delivered the opinion of the court.

Appellee recovered judgment against appellant in the sum of $500 for injuries suffered by her and which are alleged to have been produced by the negligence of appellant in permitting a sidewalk of the city to be out of repair whereby she fell and was hurt. Mo question of law arises. The sole ground upon which reversal is asked is that the evidence does not sustain the verdict, 'and the chief reason given for that contention is that the testimony of appellant’s medical experts overwhelms by its weight the testimony of appellee’s "medical experts. We have authority to weigh testimony, but we have grave doubts whether our ability to weigh it exceeds that of a trial judge and jury, especially testimony of the kind here in question.

The judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Justice G-est

delivered the opinion of the court.

Appellee recovered judgment against appellant in the sum of $500 for injuries suffered by her and which are alleged to have been produced by the negligence of appellant in permitting a sidewalk of the city to be out of repair whereby she fell and was hurt. Mo question of law arises. The sole ground upon which reversal is asked is that the evidence does not sustain the verdict, 'and the chief reason given for that contention is that the testimony of appellant’s medical experts overwhelms by its weight the testimony of appellee’s "medical experts. We have authority to weigh testimony, but we have grave doubts whether our ability to weigh it exceeds that of a trial judge and jury, especially testimony of the kind here in question.

The judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 Ill. App. 52, 1905 Ill. App. LEXIS 715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-virden-v-doyle-illappct-1905.