Rose v. Chicago City Railway Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Rose v. Chicago City Railway Co.

199 Ill. App. 600

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedJune 19, 1916

DocketGen. No. 21,364

StatusPublished

This text of 199 Ill. App. 600 (Rose v. Chicago City Railway Co.) 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

Rose v. Chicago City Railway Co., 199 Ill. App. 600 (Ill. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Pam

delivered tffe opinion of the court.

3. Witnesses, § 311*—when testimony of interested witness will not he accepted. The testimony of an interested witness as to facts inherently unprobable need not be accepted by a court or jury, although such testimony is not contradicted by other direct testimony in the case, and although the witness is not otherwise impeached. 4. Trial, § 125*—right of counsel to state to fury their views as to the law. .Counsel may properly state to the jury what they believe to be the law and base arguments thereupon.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Pam

delivered tffe opinion of the court.

3. Witnesses, § 311*—when testimony of interested witness will not he accepted. The testimony of an interested witness as to facts inherently unprobable need not be accepted by a court or jury, although such testimony is not contradicted by other direct testimony in the case, and although the witness is not otherwise impeached. 4. Trial, § 125*—right of counsel to state to fury their views as to the law. .Counsel may properly state to the jury what they believe to be the law and base arguments thereupon.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 Ill. App. 600, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rose-v-chicago-city-railway-co-illappct-1916.