Pick v. Ketchum

73 Ill. 366
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 1874
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 73 Ill. 366 (Pick v. Ketchum) 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
Pick v. Ketchum, 73 Ill. 366 (Ill. 1874).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Scholfield

delivered the opinion of the Court:

We are unable to discover any grounds for the reversal of this judgment, in the several objections urged.

No exception was taken to the ruling of the court, in refusing to continue the cause on account of the absence of the witnesses, Prachor and Chadelc; and so far as the affidavits for a continuance on account of the sickness of appellant are concerned, it is sufficient that the record shows that he was, in fact, present and testified on the trial, and it does not appear that his evidence was less full and satisfactory than it would have been had the continuance been granted. Even, therefore, if there was error in this respect, it did not prejudice appellant.

The judgment is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Ruddick v. Hollowell
125 N.E. 82 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1919)
Foley v. Kane
114 Ill. App. 544 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 Ill. 366, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pick-v-ketchum-ill-1874.