Kohn v. Columbia National Bank

Appellate Court of Illinois

Kohn v. Columbia National Bank

60 Ill. App. 304, 1895 Ill. App. LEXIS 261

DecidedOctober 17, 1895

StatusPublished

This text of 60 Ill. App. 304 (Kohn v. Columbia National Bank) 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

Kohn v. Columbia National Bank, 60 Ill. App. 304, 1895 Ill. App. LEXIS 261 (Ill. Ct. App. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Waterman

delivered the opinion oe the Court.

Day by day and year by year we are more and more impressed with the value of written evidence in determining what the real transaction between parties was. Writings do not forget, neither do they conjure up recollections in accord with what later experience has shown would have been wise.

The writing in this case, signed by the respective "parties, is utterly inconsistent with the theory of appellant; his subsequent conduct in receiving the interest upon these bonds, as well as his demand for them and affidavit stating that they were his property and not the property of the bank, is also inconsistent with his present position.

The preponderance of the evidence is with appellee, and the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed.

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

Mr. Justice Waterman

delivered the opinion oe the Court.

Day by day and year by year we are more and more impressed with the value of written evidence in determining what the real transaction between parties was. Writings do not forget, neither do they conjure up recollections in accord with what later experience has shown would have been wise.

The writing in this case, signed by the respective "parties, is utterly inconsistent with the theory of appellant; his subsequent conduct in receiving the interest upon these bonds, as well as his demand for them and affidavit stating that they were his property and not the property of the bank, is also inconsistent with his present position.

The preponderance of the evidence is with appellee, and the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 Ill. App. 304, 1895 Ill. App. LEXIS 261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kohn-v-columbia-national-bank-illappct-1895.