Ray v. Bell
Illinois Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by Bay against Bell, in the Marshall Circuit Court. The declaration contained a count on a promissory note, hereinafter set out, (in evidence,) and the common counts. The defendant pleaded non-assumpsit and payment, and on these pleas issues were formed. The venue was changed to La Salle.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by Bay against Bell, in the Marshall Circuit Court. The declaration contained a count on a promissory note, hereinafter set out, (in evidence,) and the common counts. The defendant pleaded non-assumpsit and payment, and on these pleas issues were formed. The venue was changed to La Salle. At February terin, 1860, of the La Salle Circuit Court, Hollister, Judge, presiding, the cause was tried, and the jury-rendered a verdict for defendant. Plaintiff read in evidence a promissory note, and a memorandum on the face of it, as follows: $2,300. Loam, Oct.…
1Opinion of the CourtBreese, J.
The ruling of the court, in sustaining the objection made by the defendant to the question put to the witness, Crane, on his cross-examination by the plaintiff, was wrong. Though it had no direct bearing on the merits of this controversy, and would have disclosed only that the witness, on a former trial of the cause, had been contumacious, yet it went to show the state of his feelings towards the plaintiff. Great latitude is allowed on a cross-examination of a witness, as it is one of the most efficacious tests for the ascertainment of truth. The refusal of the witness to give the name of the…
2Cited by17 opinions
- People v. PurrazzoAppellate Court of Illinois · 1981
- Chicago City Railway Co. v. MatthiesonIllinois Supreme Court · 1904
- Illinois Central Railroad v. WadeIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
- State v. HendersonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1886
- Casey v. BurnsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1955
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.