Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. Seitz

Appellate Court of Illinois

Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. Seitz

117 Ill. App. 154, 1904 Ill. App. LEXIS 208

DecidedNovember 26, 1904

StatusPublished

This text of 117 Ill. App. 154 (Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. Seitz) 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

Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. Seitz, 117 Ill. App. 154, 1904 Ill. App. LEXIS 208 (Ill. Ct. App. 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice GS-est

delivered the opinion of the court.

It cannot be learned from the abstract furnished to us in this case whether a complete and authenticated copy of the record in this case has been filed in this court or not. The rules of this court require a complete abstract to be furnished. For this reason the judgment must be affirmed.

Furthermore, this case has been three times tried in the court below and this is the third appeal to this court. Upon the first appeal the judgment was reversed and the cause remanded because of the admission of incompetent evidence and because the damages were excessive. I. C. R. R. Co. v. Seitz, 105 Ill. App. 89. Upon the second appeal the judgment was reversed and the cause remanded because of improper remarks of counsel, and because the damages were excessive. I. C. R. R. Co. v. Seitz, 111 Ill. App. 242.

The finding of the trial court, (predicated upon the evidence adduced upon the former trial and upon a consideration of the questions of law then presented) and the judgment thereon, involved in the present appeal, was in favor of appellee and against appellant for $823.50. The questions of law involved have been twice determined by this court adversely to the contention of the appellant and we are content with that determination.

Affirmed.

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

Mr. Justice GS-est

delivered the opinion of the court.

It cannot be learned from the abstract furnished to us in this case whether a complete and authenticated copy of the record in this case has been filed in this court or not. The rules of this court require a complete abstract to be furnished. For this reason the judgment must be affirmed.

Furthermore, this case has been three times tried in the court below and this is the third appeal to this court. Upon the first appeal the judgment was reversed and the cause remanded because of the admission of incompetent evidence and because the damages were excessive. I. C. R. R. Co. v. Seitz, 105 Ill. App. 89. Upon the second appeal the judgment was reversed and the cause remanded because of improper remarks of counsel, and because the damages were excessive. I. C. R. R. Co. v. Seitz, 111 Ill. App. 242.

The finding of the trial court, (predicated upon the evidence adduced upon the former trial and upon a consideration of the questions of law then presented) and the judgment thereon, involved in the present appeal, was in favor of appellee and against appellant for $823.50. The questions of law involved have been twice determined by this court adversely to the contention of the appellant and we are content with that determination.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 Ill. App. 154, 1904 Ill. App. LEXIS 208, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/illinois-central-railroad-co-v-seitz-illappct-1904.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack