George J. Cooke Co. v. Fitman

Appellate Court of Illinois

George J. Cooke Co. v. Fitman

159 Ill. App. 555, 1911 Ill. App. LEXIS 1021

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedFebruary 3, 1911

DocketGen. No. 15,222

StatusPublished

This text of 159 Ill. App. 555 (George J. Cooke Co. v. Fitman) 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

George J. Cooke Co. v. Fitman, 159 Ill. App. 555, 1911 Ill. App. LEXIS 1021 (Ill. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.

This writ of error brings before us for review a judgment rendered by the Municipal Court in favor of the defendant in error for $125, for the alleged conversion of certain saloon fixtures.

It appears that plaintiffs in error were „ conducting a saloon in Chicago, and, desiring to take beer from the defendant in error, they induced it to purchase for $125, from another brewing company, whose beer they had theretofore been selling, the fixtures in question, which were on the saloon premises. After continuing in this business relation for about six months, plaintiffs in error ceased buying beer from the Cooke Company, and the other brewing company resumed supplying the saloon, the ownership of which had passed into other hands. After unsuccessfully attempting to get plaintiffs in error to turn over to it the fixtures, the Cooke Company sued for their value.

The case was tried by a jury, and, while the evidence is not entirely clear, we think it appears that substantial justice has been done, and we do not see that the action of the court below was erroneous.

Affirmed.

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

Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.

This writ of error brings before us for review a judgment rendered by the Municipal Court in favor of the defendant in error for $125, for the alleged conversion of certain saloon fixtures.

It appears that plaintiffs in error were „ conducting a saloon in Chicago, and, desiring to take beer from the defendant in error, they induced it to purchase for $125, from another brewing company, whose beer they had theretofore been selling, the fixtures in question, which were on the saloon premises. After continuing in this business relation for about six months, plaintiffs in error ceased buying beer from the Cooke Company, and the other brewing company resumed supplying the saloon, the ownership of which had passed into other hands. After unsuccessfully attempting to get plaintiffs in error to turn over to it the fixtures, the Cooke Company sued for their value.

The case was tried by a jury, and, while the evidence is not entirely clear, we think it appears that substantial justice has been done, and we do not see that the action of the court below was erroneous.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 Ill. App. 555, 1911 Ill. App. LEXIS 1021, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-j-cooke-co-v-fitman-illappct-1911.