Home/Appellate Court of Illinois/Holler v. Chicago City Railway Co.

Holler v. Chicago City Railway Co.

209 Ill. App. 140, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 937
CourtAppellate Court of Illinois
DecidedDecember 17, 1917
DocketGen. No. 23,383
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 209 Ill. App. 140 (Holler v. Chicago City Railway 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
Holler v. Chicago City Railway Co., 209 Ill. App. 140, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 937 (Ill. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Instructions, § 14*—impropriety of emphasizing proposition in different instructions. Emphasis by frequent repetition, even of a particular properly given proposition in instructions, is objectionable. 4. Appeal and ebbor, § 1537*—when repetition and emphasizing of position of party in instructions is harmless error. It is not reversible error to repeat and emphasize in several instructions in a personal injury case the position of one of the parties in reference to a material issue where the verdict is correct. 5. Appeal and error, § 1466*—when error in admission of evidence is not ground for reversal. Error in the admission of evidence is not ground for reversal when the verdict is just and the only one that could have been rendered in the case.

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

Related

Krueger v. Richardson
61 N.E.2d 399 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1945)
Grubczak v. Chicago Railways Co.
242 Ill. App. 384 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
209 Ill. App. 140, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holler-v-chicago-city-railway-co-illappct-1917.