Story Finishing Co. v. Kerting

Appellate Court of Illinois

Story Finishing Co. v. Kerting

157 Ill. App. 221, 1910 Ill. App. LEXIS 264

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedOctober 20, 1910

DocketGen. No. 15,349

StatusPublished

This text of 157 Ill. App. 221 (Story Finishing Co. v. Kerting) 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

Story Finishing Co. v. Kerting, 157 Ill. App. 221, 1910 Ill. App. LEXIS 264 (Ill. Ct. App. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Baker

delivered the opinion of the court.

Plaintiff’s claim in this case was for goods sold and delivered by plaintiff to defendant amounting, at the price charged by plaintiff, to $1,628.33. Plaintiff admitted that defendant had made payments amounting to $1,503.23, leaving a balance due plaintiff, according to its contention, of $125, and for that sum plaintiff had judgment. The sale and delivery of the goods were not disputed, but the contention of the defendant was that for many of the goods plaintiff had overcharged defendant; that such overcharges amounted to $296.47, and that defendant had paid plaintiff $200 more than the sum of $1,503.23, for which plaintiff had given him credit. On cross-examination defendant was asked: “Except for these overcharges and these cash payments which you claim in your statement, this bill which ife rendered you is correct ?” and answered: “Yes sir, otherwise it is correct.”

The only question presented in the case are questions of fact. The testimony both on the question of overcharges, and of payments, not credited, was conflicting. The trial judge heard the witnesses and in effect found, that the plaintiff had not overcharged the defendant and had credited him with all the money he had paid plaintiff. We cannot, on the evidence in the record, say that such finding is against the evidence, and the judgment will therefore he affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Mr. Justice Baker

delivered the opinion of the court.

Plaintiff’s claim in this case was for goods sold and delivered by plaintiff to defendant amounting, at the price charged by plaintiff, to $1,628.33. Plaintiff admitted that defendant had made payments amounting to $1,503.23, leaving a balance due plaintiff, according to its contention, of $125, and for that sum plaintiff had judgment. The sale and delivery of the goods were not disputed, but the contention of the defendant was that for many of the goods plaintiff had overcharged defendant; that such overcharges amounted to $296.47, and that defendant had paid plaintiff $200 more than the sum of $1,503.23, for which plaintiff had given him credit. On cross-examination defendant was asked: “Except for these overcharges and these cash payments which you claim in your statement, this bill which ife rendered you is correct ?” and answered: “Yes sir, otherwise it is correct.”

The only question presented in the case are questions of fact. The testimony both on the question of overcharges, and of payments, not credited, was conflicting. The trial judge heard the witnesses and in effect found, that the plaintiff had not overcharged the defendant and had credited him with all the money he had paid plaintiff. We cannot, on the evidence in the record, say that such finding is against the evidence, and the judgment will therefore he affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 Ill. App. 221, 1910 Ill. App. LEXIS 264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/story-finishing-co-v-kerting-illappct-1910.