Higgins v. Lee
Illinois Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by appellee against appellant in the County Court of La Salle County, to the March term, A. D. 1855. The declaration contained one special count and the common counts.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by appellee against appellant in the County Court of La Salle County, to the March term, A. D. 1855. The declaration contained one special count and the common counts. The special count averred that by a certain agreement, made on the 21st December, A. D. 1852, between plaintiff and defendant, the plaintiff agreed to furnish all the materials, such as lath, nails, lime, sand, etc., and do all the labor in plastering and stucco work, required to be done on the building then being built by said defendant, and known as the “ Chambers House said plastering…
1Opinion of the CourtScales, C. J.
Where it is appanent, as it is here, that the jury must have misunderstood, or disregarded the evidence or instructions of the court, or neglected properly to consider the facts, or overlooked prominent and essential points in them, and have failed to do substantial justice, we are compelled to set the verdict aside and grant a new trial. Wendell v. Safford’s Executor, 12 N. Hamp. R. 171; Inhabitants of Bangor v. Inhabitants of Brunswick, 27 Maine R. 351; Gordon v. Crooks, 11 Ill. R. 142.
A now trial will be granted also, for misdirections of the court on the law, or for withholding proper…
2Cited by17 opinions
- K. Miller Const. Co., Inc. v. McGinnisAppellate Court of Illinois · 2009
- Corcoran v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1940
- Cooke v. PrebleIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
- Schweickhart v. StueweWisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
- Selamakos v. Victory Ice & Ice Cream Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1927
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.