McCreary v. Newberry

Illinois Supreme Court

McCreary v. Newberry

25 Ill. 496

CourtIllinois Supreme Court

DecidedApril 15, 1861

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 25 Ill. 496 (McCreary v. Newberry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McCreary v. Newberry, 25 Ill. 496 (Ill. 1861).

Pincite

Opinion

Caton, C. J.

We are of opinion that the court below properly overruled the motion for a continuance. The issue presented and to be tried was, whether the defendant had funds at the Marine Bank suEcient to pay the note on the day of its maturity. The aEdavit showed that he could prove by the absent witness, that he had funds there four days after the maturity. There was no issue to which this testimony would have been pertinent, and we think the continuance was properly denied.

The judgment is aErmed. Judgment affirmed.

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

Caton, C. J.

We are of opinion that the court below properly overruled the motion for a continuance. The issue presented and to be tried was, whether the defendant had funds at the Marine Bank suEcient to pay the note on the day of its maturity. The aEdavit showed that he could prove by the absent witness, that he had funds there four days after the maturity. There was no issue to which this testimony would have been pertinent, and we think the continuance was properly denied.

The judgment is aErmed. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 Ill. 496, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccreary-v-newberry-ill-1861.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack