Huber v. Schmacht

Appellate Court of Illinois

Huber v. Schmacht

39 Ill. App. 229, 1890 Ill. App. LEXIS 447

DecidedMay 21, 1891

StatusPublished

This text of 39 Ill. App. 229 (Huber v. Schmacht) 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

Huber v. Schmacht, 39 Ill. App. 229, 1890 Ill. App. LEXIS 447 (Ill. Ct. App. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

C. B. Smith, P. J.

This was a suit brought on a promissory note for $250 executed by Herman Schmacht to appellant, Huber. Huber claimed that there was still due and unpaid, $150 on the note. Appellee set up the defense of payment of the note in full, and also filed a counter claim against appellant for repairs and money paid on account of appellant. The case was tried before the court and a jury, and the jury rendered a verdict in favor of appellee on his offset, and assessed his damages at $75.65. The court overruled a motion for a new trial, and gave judgment on the verdict. Appellant brings the case here on appeal, and insists that the verdict and judgment are against the evidence. Ho other question is presented. An examination of the record shows that the evidence upon the payment, as well as upon the counter claim or set-off of the defendant, was sharply conflicting. Hnder the evidence the jury might have found either way, and there would have been evidence to support such a finding. It was for the jury to say who of these witnesses were most worthy of belief. We can not say they were mistaken, or that they erred in their judgment.

Before we are authorized to set aside a verdict we must be satisfied that it is clearly against the weight of the evidence. We are not so satisfied in this case, and the judgment will be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

C. B. Smith, P. J.

This was a suit brought on a promissory note for $250 executed by Herman Schmacht to appellant, Huber. Huber claimed that there was still due and unpaid, $150 on the note. Appellee set up the defense of payment of the note in full, and also filed a counter claim against appellant for repairs and money paid on account of appellant. The case was tried before the court and a jury, and the jury rendered a verdict in favor of appellee on his offset, and assessed his damages at $75.65. The court overruled a motion for a new trial, and gave judgment on the verdict. Appellant brings the case here on appeal, and insists that the verdict and judgment are against the evidence. Ho other question is presented. An examination of the record shows that the evidence upon the payment, as well as upon the counter claim or set-off of the defendant, was sharply conflicting. Hnder the evidence the jury might have found either way, and there would have been evidence to support such a finding. It was for the jury to say who of these witnesses were most worthy of belief. We can not say they were mistaken, or that they erred in their judgment.

Before we are authorized to set aside a verdict we must be satisfied that it is clearly against the weight of the evidence. We are not so satisfied in this case, and the judgment will be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 Ill. App. 229, 1890 Ill. App. LEXIS 447, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/huber-v-schmacht-illappct-1891.