Teehan v. Union Bridge Co.
Appellate Court of Illinois
Action in Case, for personal injuries. Trial in the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. John Barton Payne, Judge, presiding. Verdict for plaintiff. Judgment, non obstante veredicto, for defendant; appeal by plaintiff. Heard in this court at the March term, 1899;
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Presiding Justice Sears
delivered the opinion of the court.
The motion by appellees, who were the defendants in the court below, for a judgment non obstante veredicto, was inapt. Such judgment can only be given for a plaintiff. The practice is to be availed of only when the plaintiff has established his case and the defendant has failed to plead any sufficient defense. 2 Tidd’s Practice, 920; 1 Chitty, 688; Stephen’s Pl. 98; 1 Black on Judg., Sec. 16; Freeman on Judg., Sec. 7; Hitchcock v. Haight, 2 Gil. 604; German Ins. Co. v. Frederick, 58 Fed. Rep. 144.
The only decision contra, which is…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. DunleavyIllinois Supreme Court · 1889
- Ebsery v. Chicago City Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1897
- Quick v. Indianapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1889
3Cited by6 opinions
- Farmer v. Alton Building & Loan Ass'nAppellate Court of Illinois · 1938
- Chicago City Railway Co. v. WhiteAppellate Court of Illinois · 1903
- Modern Woodmen of America v. BlairAppellate Court of Illinois · 1931
- Tribune Co. v. Dunlap Manufacturing Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1916
- Royal Manufacturing Co. v. Garfield Sanitary Felt Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1925
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.