Peter Hand Brewing Co. v. Nauseda

Appellate Court of Illinois

Peter Hand Brewing Co. v. Nauseda

210 Ill. App. 153, 1918 Ill. App. LEXIS 167

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedMarch 25, 1918

DocketGen. No. 23,898

StatusPublished

This text of 210 Ill. App. 153 (Peter Hand Brewing Co. v. Nauseda) 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

Peter Hand Brewing Co. v. Nauseda, 210 Ill. App. 153, 1918 Ill. App. LEXIS 167 (Ill. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an appeal from an order denying the motion of defendants to open up a judgment entered by confession and for leave to plead to the merits.

Since defendants filed their briefs on motion of the plaintiff the bill of exceptions has been stricken from the record leaving only the statutory record before us for review.

The abstract, which is the pleading of the defendants, contains the affidavits read upon the hearing of the motion to open the judgment. These have no place in the statutory record, but belong in the bill of exceptions. As the latter document has been stricken we are not privileged to examine or review these affidavits and consequently are not at liberty to decide their probative force, but must assume that the ruling of the trial judge on the motion was correct and not in the condition of the record subject to challenge. Horn v. Neu, 63 Ill. 539; Alward v. Harper, 253 Ill. 294; People v. Board of Review of Cook County, 263 Ill. 326.

In the condition of the record before us the judgment must be affirmed. Schwarts v. Brinks Chicago City Exp. Co., 198 Ill. App. 381.

The judgment of the Municipal Court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an appeal from an order denying the motion of defendants to open up a judgment entered by confession and for leave to plead to the merits.

Since defendants filed their briefs on motion of the plaintiff the bill of exceptions has been stricken from the record leaving only the statutory record before us for review.

The abstract, which is the pleading of the defendants, contains the affidavits read upon the hearing of the motion to open the judgment. These have no place in the statutory record, but belong in the bill of exceptions. As the latter document has been stricken we are not privileged to examine or review these affidavits and consequently are not at liberty to decide their probative force, but must assume that the ruling of the trial judge on the motion was correct and not in the condition of the record subject to challenge. Horn v. Neu, 63 Ill. 539; Alward v. Harper, 253 Ill. 294; People v. Board of Review of Cook County, 263 Ill. 326.

In the condition of the record before us the judgment must be affirmed. Schwarts v. Brinks Chicago City Exp. Co., 198 Ill. App. 381.

The judgment of the Municipal Court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 Ill. App. 153, 1918 Ill. App. LEXIS 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peter-hand-brewing-co-v-nauseda-illappct-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack