Francis v. Soucy

Appellate Court of Illinois

Francis v. Soucy

194 Ill. App. 260

DecidedJuly 21, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 194 Ill. App. 260 (Francis v. Soucy) 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

Francis v. Soucy, 194 Ill. App. 260 (Ill. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Landlord and tenant, § 325a*—instruction as compromise of claim for rent. An instruction in an action for rent, as to a compromise of the tenant’s claim for dapage for nonrepair, held not prejudicial where the jury found against such claim. 4. Trial, § 45*—calling attention of jury to inconsistency of general verdict and special findings. A statement made by the trial judge to the jury that: “There seems to be a variance between the special finding and general verdict; they are not consistent. Are you satisfied with this verdict? If not, you may retire with the officer to your room to further consider the same,” held not to call attention to any particular finding.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Landlord and tenant, § 325a*—instruction as compromise of claim for rent. An instruction in an action for rent, as to a compromise of the tenant’s claim for dapage for nonrepair, held not prejudicial where the jury found against such claim. 4. Trial, § 45*—calling attention of jury to inconsistency of general verdict and special findings. A statement made by the trial judge to the jury that: “There seems to be a variance between the special finding and general verdict; they are not consistent. Are you satisfied with this verdict? If not, you may retire with the officer to your room to further consider the same,” held not to call attention to any particular finding.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 Ill. App. 260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/francis-v-soucy-illappct-1915.