County of Madison v. Halliburton

Appellate Court of Illinois

County of Madison v. Halliburton

64 Ill. App. 99, 1895 Ill. App. LEXIS 1015

DecidedDecember 6, 1895

StatusPublished

This text of 64 Ill. App. 99 (County of Madison v. Halliburton) 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

County of Madison v. Halliburton, 64 Ill. App. 99, 1895 Ill. App. LEXIS 1015 (Ill. Ct. App. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Pleasants

delivered the opinion op the Court.

This is a companion case to that of the same appellant vs. William A. Haskell, in which an opinion has been filed. The only difference between them claimed to affect the question of appellant’s liability is that at the time of the Wann disaster, and during all the time of treatment of the victims in the hospital, appellee was the county physician at an annual salary which was duly paid. He testified, however, that his contract, which was verbal, covered the cases of the county “ poor” only; that he so claimed to the supervisors of the two townships, who concurred in his understanding that it did not embrace those here in question, and we think the court was fully warranted by the evidence in so finding.

Appellant furnished no materials, and therefore the judgment was for $532.60, being less than Dr. Haskell’s by just the cost of the materials furnished by the latter. Judgment affirmed.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Pleasants

delivered the opinion op the Court.

This is a companion case to that of the same appellant vs. William A. Haskell, in which an opinion has been filed. The only difference between them claimed to affect the question of appellant’s liability is that at the time of the Wann disaster, and during all the time of treatment of the victims in the hospital, appellee was the county physician at an annual salary which was duly paid. He testified, however, that his contract, which was verbal, covered the cases of the county “ poor” only; that he so claimed to the supervisors of the two townships, who concurred in his understanding that it did not embrace those here in question, and we think the court was fully warranted by the evidence in so finding.

Appellant furnished no materials, and therefore the judgment was for $532.60, being less than Dr. Haskell’s by just the cost of the materials furnished by the latter. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 Ill. App. 99, 1895 Ill. App. LEXIS 1015, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/county-of-madison-v-halliburton-illappct-1895.