Hedrich v. United States Brewing Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Hedrich v. United States Brewing Co.

205 Ill. App. 266, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 1093

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedApril 10, 1917

DocketGen. No. 22,292

StatusPublished

This text of 205 Ill. App. 266 (Hedrich v. United States Brewing Co.) 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

Hedrich v. United States Brewing Co., 205 Ill. App. 266, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 1093 (Ill. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice McDonald

delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Landlobd and tenant, § 321*—when exelusion of evidence in action for rent is reversible error. Where, in an action for rent under a lease, one of the issues involved was the ownership of certain property which the lessee removed from the demised premises, and plaintiff introduced evidence as to’ his ownership and installation of the property, and defendant offered countervailing evidence that it had installed the property, and an objection by plaintiff to such evidence was sustained, held that as the value of the property was included in plaintiff’s claim and constituted part of the allowance of damages, the refusal to admit such evidence constituted reversible error.

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

Mr. Justice McDonald

delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Landlobd and tenant, § 321*—when exelusion of evidence in action for rent is reversible error. Where, in an action for rent under a lease, one of the issues involved was the ownership of certain property which the lessee removed from the demised premises, and plaintiff introduced evidence as to’ his ownership and installation of the property, and defendant offered countervailing evidence that it had installed the property, and an objection by plaintiff to such evidence was sustained, held that as the value of the property was included in plaintiff’s claim and constituted part of the allowance of damages, the refusal to admit such evidence constituted reversible error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 Ill. App. 266, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 1093, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hedrich-v-united-states-brewing-co-illappct-1917.