Phenix Insurance v. Woland

Appellate Court of Illinois

Phenix Insurance v. Woland

48 Ill. App. 535, 1892 Ill. App. LEXIS 533

DecidedDecember 2, 1892

StatusPublished

This text of 48 Ill. App. 535 (Phenix Insurance v. Woland) 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

Phenix Insurance v. Woland, 48 Ill. App. 535, 1892 Ill. App. LEXIS 533 (Ill. Ct. App. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

by the Court.

This suit was on a note for §14.50, given by appellee to appellant, commenced before a justice of the peace and removed by appeal to the Circuit Court, where, upon a trial by jury, there was a verdict for appellee. The Circuit Court denied a motion for new trial and rendered judgment for costs against the appellant.

It is urged, mainly, by counsel for the appellant, that the finding of the jury is against the preponderance of the evidence. The defense was a failure of consideration; and the evidence was certainly very much in conflict. The jury chose to accept the version of the appellee, and we are not able to say that they were without warrant in so doing.

It is needless to enter into a statement of the testimony or to discuss it in detail. We can not, in our opinion, reverse the judgment on this ground.

It is assigned as error that the court refused to give instructions Nos. 5 and 6 asked by appellant. We think these instructions did not fully or perfectly state the facts in controversy and for that reason might have been refused, and further, that all there is in them which appellant was entitled to was embraced in the fourth instruction that was given. We think there was no error in the instructions given for appellee and that upon the whole case there is no occasion to interfere with the judgment of the Circuit Court, which is therefore affirmed.

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

Opinion

by the Court.

This suit was on a note for §14.50, given by appellee to appellant, commenced before a justice of the peace and removed by appeal to the Circuit Court, where, upon a trial by jury, there was a verdict for appellee. The Circuit Court denied a motion for new trial and rendered judgment for costs against the appellant.

It is urged, mainly, by counsel for the appellant, that the finding of the jury is against the preponderance of the evidence. The defense was a failure of consideration; and the evidence was certainly very much in conflict. The jury chose to accept the version of the appellee, and we are not able to say that they were without warrant in so doing.

It is needless to enter into a statement of the testimony or to discuss it in detail. We can not, in our opinion, reverse the judgment on this ground.

It is assigned as error that the court refused to give instructions Nos. 5 and 6 asked by appellant. We think these instructions did not fully or perfectly state the facts in controversy and for that reason might have been refused, and further, that all there is in them which appellant was entitled to was embraced in the fourth instruction that was given. We think there was no error in the instructions given for appellee and that upon the whole case there is no occasion to interfere with the judgment of the Circuit Court, which is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 Ill. App. 535, 1892 Ill. App. LEXIS 533, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phenix-insurance-v-woland-illappct-1892.