Rosenthal v. Turner

Appellate Court of Illinois

Rosenthal v. Turner

192 Ill. App. 9, 1915 Ill. App. LEXIS 724

Appellate Court of Illinois·Decided March 11, 1915·No. Gen. No. 20,239·Published

Opinion

Mr. Justice Pam

delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Witnesses, § 212*—question not within direct examination. Questions on cross-examination which are not within the scope of the direct examination are properly excluded. 4. Appeal and ebbor, § 1235*—when acquiescence bars review. Although under Practice Act, sec. 81 (J. & A. 8618), where a cause is brought up for review upon a stenographic report, it is not necessary to preserve an exception, still the record must show that the ruling complained of was an adverse one, hence cross-errors based upon instructions not to allow interest will not be considered where the attitude of counsel for the complaining party indicated acquiescence therein.

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

Mr. Justice Pam

delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Witnesses, § 212*—question not within direct examination. Questions on cross-examination which are not within the scope of the direct examination are properly excluded. 4. Appeal and ebbor, § 1235*—when acquiescence bars review. Although under Practice Act, sec. 81 (J. & A. 8618), where a cause is brought up for review upon a stenographic report, it is not necessary to preserve an exception, still the record must show that the ruling complained of was an adverse one, hence cross-errors based upon instructions not to allow interest will not be considered where the attitude of counsel for the complaining party indicated acquiescence therein.

Rosenthal v. Turner, 192 Ill. App. 9, 1915 Ill. App. LEXIS 724 (Ill. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

192 Ill. App. 9 (Rosenthal v. Turner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.