Tompkins v. Mann

Appellate Court of Illinois

Tompkins v. Mann

6 Ill. App. 171, 1880 Ill. App. LEXIS 52

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedMarch 29, 1880

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 6 Ill. App. 171 (Tompkins v. Mann) 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

Tompkins v. Mann, 6 Ill. App. 171, 1880 Ill. App. LEXIS 52 (Ill. Ct. App. 1880).

Pincite

Opinion

Bailey, P. J.

In this case the plaintiff in error brings here for review, an order of the court below vacating a judgment previously entered in said court "by confession under a warrant of attorney. The bill of exceptions recites, that on the hearing of the motion to vacate said judgment, certain affidavits therein set forth were introduced by the defendants in error, hut there is no statement or certificate that the bill of exceptions contains all the evidence introduced upon said hearing. In the absence of such certificate, it will be presumed that sufficient evidence was heard by the court to support and warrant its decision. The only questions raised by the plaintiff in error relate to the sufficiency of the evidence, hut as the record stands, none of said questions can be considered. It follows that the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Bailey, P. J.

In this case the plaintiff in error brings here for review, an order of the court below vacating a judgment previously entered in said court "by confession under a warrant of attorney. The bill of exceptions recites, that on the hearing of the motion to vacate said judgment, certain affidavits therein set forth were introduced by the defendants in error, hut there is no statement or certificate that the bill of exceptions contains all the evidence introduced upon said hearing. In the absence of such certificate, it will be presumed that sufficient evidence was heard by the court to support and warrant its decision. The only questions raised by the plaintiff in error relate to the sufficiency of the evidence, hut as the record stands, none of said questions can be considered. It follows that the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Ill. App. 171, 1880 Ill. App. LEXIS 52, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tompkins-v-mann-illappct-1880.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack