Silsbe v. Lucas
Illinois Supreme Court
Appeal from, the Alton City Court; the Hon. Henry S. Baker, Judge, presiding. This was an action of debt, on a bond, brought by John Silsbe against Napoleon B. Lucas, Thomas McDow and John Utt, to the April term, 1867, of the circuit court of Jersey county, and afterward taken, by change of venue, to the Alton City Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, the Alton City Court; the Hon. Henry S. Baker, Judge, presiding. This was an action of debt, on a bond, brought by John Silsbe against Napoleon B. Lucas, Thomas McDow and John Utt, to the April term, 1867, of the circuit court of Jersey county, and afterward taken, by change of venue, to the Alton City Court. It appears that Lucas, on the third of January, 1856, borrowed of Silsbe the sum of $1,574.90, for which he executed his note, payable on the third day of January, 1858, with ten per cent interest per annum; that he procured the loan for the purpose of redeeming the S. half…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Walker
It is insisted by appellant that the court below erred in the admission of evidence on the trial, and should have granted a new trial for that reason. On the other side, it is urged that, there having been two new trials previously granted, a further new trial was prohibited by the statute. The provision of the statute referred to as opposed to granting another new trial is the thirty-fourth section of the practice act. (Gross’ Comp.) It declares that, “ No more than two new trials shall be granted to the same party in the same cause.” The question is presented, whether this provision was…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Mt. Adams & E. P. Inclined Ry. Co. v. LoweryCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1896
- Norkevich v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1931
- Parmly v. FarrarIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
- Spriggs v. JamersonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1913
- Parmly v. FarrarAppellate Court of Illinois · 1896
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.