Gerrity v. Brady

Appellate Court of Illinois

Gerrity v. Brady

44 Ill. App. 203, 1892 Ill. App. LEXIS 564

DecidedMarch 19, 1892

StatusPublished

This text of 44 Ill. App. 203 (Gerrity v. Brady) 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

Gerrity v. Brady, 44 Ill. App. 203, 1892 Ill. App. LEXIS 564 (Ill. Ct. App. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Gary, J.

The appellant sued the appellee, specially setting out the circumstances which he averred constituted a gambling transaction, by which the appellee was winner of $500 of his money that he wants back. Without more extra judicial knowledge than the present members of this court possess, of the various devices for gambling, that averment seems inconsistent with the facts alleged, and a bare averment of a conclusion is not good pleading. Facts from which the court can see that the conclusion follows, should be stated.

“ The terms fact and truth are often used in common parlance as synonymous; but, as employed in reference to pleading, they are widely different. A fact in pleading is a circumstance, act, event, or incident; a truth is the legal jn’inciple which declares or governs the facts, and their operation and effect. Admitting the facts stated in a complaint, the truth may be that the plaintiff is not entitled, upon the face of his complaint, to what he claims.” Drake v. Cockroff, 10 How. Pr. R. 377. This quotation is made as apposite to the frequent argument that such averments, of results, are averments of facts.

"Why, if the appellant has any cause of action, does he not follow the directions Sec. 132, Criminal Code % Judgment affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Gary, J.

The appellant sued the appellee, specially setting out the circumstances which he averred constituted a gambling transaction, by which the appellee was winner of $500 of his money that he wants back. Without more extra judicial knowledge than the present members of this court possess, of the various devices for gambling, that averment seems inconsistent with the facts alleged, and a bare averment of a conclusion is not good pleading. Facts from which the court can see that the conclusion follows, should be stated.

“ The terms fact and truth are often used in common parlance as synonymous; but, as employed in reference to pleading, they are widely different. A fact in pleading is a circumstance, act, event, or incident; a truth is the legal jn’inciple which declares or governs the facts, and their operation and effect. Admitting the facts stated in a complaint, the truth may be that the plaintiff is not entitled, upon the face of his complaint, to what he claims.” Drake v. Cockroff, 10 How. Pr. R. 377. This quotation is made as apposite to the frequent argument that such averments, of results, are averments of facts.

"Why, if the appellant has any cause of action, does he not follow the directions Sec. 132, Criminal Code % Judgment affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 Ill. App. 203, 1892 Ill. App. LEXIS 564, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gerrity-v-brady-illappct-1892.