Olson v. Carlson

Appellate Court of Illinois

Olson v. Carlson

168 Ill. App. 561, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 1181

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedMarch 28, 1912

DocketGen. No. 16,290

StatusPublished

This text of 168 Ill. App. 561 (Olson v. Carlson) 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

Olson v. Carlson, 168 Ill. App. 561, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 1181 (Ill. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.

Andrew Olson, plaintiff below, sued Carolus Carlson, defendant below, to recover the sum of $300, together with interest thereon, which said sum he says he loaned Carlson in June, 1904, at the latter’s request. Olson demanded a jury trial, which was had, and a verdict for $390 was returned in his favor, upon which judgment was entered.

Counsel for Carlson here contends that the verdict and judgment are manifestly against the weight of the evidence. To this we cannot agree. Olson testified very positively as to the making of the loan, and Carlson with equal positiveness denied that he ever borrowed or received any money from Olson. The evidence in the ease, as counsel for Carlson says in his brief,, was “conflicting and irreconcilable”. We believe that, under all the evidence, the jury was justified in returning the verdict, and we are not disposed to interfere with the judgment. And, in our opinion, the trial court did not err in refusing to admit certain evidence offered by the defendant, which refusal is complained of; nor do we think that certain remarks made by the trial court, and assigned as error, were prejudicial to the rights of the defendant. The judgment is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.

Andrew Olson, plaintiff below, sued Carolus Carlson, defendant below, to recover the sum of $300, together with interest thereon, which said sum he says he loaned Carlson in June, 1904, at the latter’s request. Olson demanded a jury trial, which was had, and a verdict for $390 was returned in his favor, upon which judgment was entered.

Counsel for Carlson here contends that the verdict and judgment are manifestly against the weight of the evidence. To this we cannot agree. Olson testified very positively as to the making of the loan, and Carlson with equal positiveness denied that he ever borrowed or received any money from Olson. The evidence in the ease, as counsel for Carlson says in his brief,, was “conflicting and irreconcilable”. We believe that, under all the evidence, the jury was justified in returning the verdict, and we are not disposed to interfere with the judgment. And, in our opinion, the trial court did not err in refusing to admit certain evidence offered by the defendant, which refusal is complained of; nor do we think that certain remarks made by the trial court, and assigned as error, were prejudicial to the rights of the defendant. The judgment is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 Ill. App. 561, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 1181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/olson-v-carlson-illappct-1912.