Stern v. Welensky

Appellate Court of Illinois

Stern v. Welensky

182 Ill. App. 417, 1913 Ill. App. LEXIS 467

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedOctober 15, 1913

DocketGen. No. 18,094

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 182 Ill. App. 417 (Stern v. Welensky) 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

Stern v. Welensky, 182 Ill. App. 417, 1913 Ill. App. LEXIS 467 (Ill. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Graves

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Bailment, § 12*—when bailee is liable for failure to return articles. Where a patron of a bathing establishment delivered property to such establishment as bailee and such property could not be returned on demand a presumption of negligence on the part of the bailee arose, and since the bailee failed to show that the property had been lost by some violence, accident or theft, it was liable for the value thereof. 3. New trial, § 67*—when awarded. Newly discovered evidence in order to require the granting of a new trial, must be of a conclusive character against the verdict returned and a new trial will not be awarded for the sole purpose of impeaching a witness, even though such witness is a party, particularly where the evidence given relates to an immaterial matter. 4. Bailment, § 27*—what evidence is material. Where a bailor shows that he deposited money and valuables with a bailee, it is wholly immaterial how such bailor acquired the property deposited.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Graves

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Bailment, § 12*—when bailee is liable for failure to return articles. Where a patron of a bathing establishment delivered property to such establishment as bailee and such property could not be returned on demand a presumption of negligence on the part of the bailee arose, and since the bailee failed to show that the property had been lost by some violence, accident or theft, it was liable for the value thereof. 3. New trial, § 67*—when awarded. Newly discovered evidence in order to require the granting of a new trial, must be of a conclusive character against the verdict returned and a new trial will not be awarded for the sole purpose of impeaching a witness, even though such witness is a party, particularly where the evidence given relates to an immaterial matter. 4. Bailment, § 27*—what evidence is material. Where a bailor shows that he deposited money and valuables with a bailee, it is wholly immaterial how such bailor acquired the property deposited.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 Ill. App. 417, 1913 Ill. App. LEXIS 467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stern-v-welensky-illappct-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack