Legal Opinion
Florez v. Brown
Appellate Court of Illinois
Decided October 23, 1890PublishedCited by 2 opinions
In error to the Superior Court of Cook Count}'; the Hon. Kirk Hawes, Judge, presiding.
1Opinion of the CourtMoran, P. J.
In this case the errors assigned on the record and argued in the brief of counsel, relate wholly to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict of the jury. The printed abstract filed, instead of being an abridgment of the record, is a mere index to the evidence in the following form:
“ 38 to 52 inclusive. Testimony of R. A. Brown on his own behalf.”
“ 54 to 61 inclusive. Original testimony of Sam W. Gregory, on behalf of plaintiff.”
There is not a word of evidence in the abstract.
Rule 21 of this court provides: “ In all cases, the party bringing a cause into this court shall furnish…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hanchett v. Riverdale Distillery Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1884
- Lake v. LowerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1889
- Israel v. Town of WhitehallAppellate Court of Illinois · 1877
- People ex rel. Rosenberg v. AngererAppellate Court of Illinois · 1887
- Mueller v. NewellAppellate Court of Illinois · 1888
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Mallers v. Crane Elevator Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1895
- Burk v. WeberAppellate Court of Illinois · 1936