Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Feulner v. Gillam

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided December 3, 1919No. Gen. No. 24,444Published

Error to the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Martin M. Gridlet, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1918.

1ConcurrenceJustice O’Connor

specially concurring:

I concur in the conclusion reached that the judgment of the Superior Court be reversed and the cause remanded for the sole reason that the court refused to give the instruction limiting the will, which was admitted in evidence, to the question as to whether the note had been forgiven the defendant. But in my opinion, there was no error in permitting the defendant to testify over objection that the note in controversy belonged to her mother. 3 Wigmore on Evidence, sec. 1960; Maginnis v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 160 Ill. App. 614; Fisher v. Bennehoff, 121 Ill. 426; Pichler…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sokel v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Fisher v. BennehoffIllinois Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Pichler v. . ReeseNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
  4. Murphy v. OlberdingSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
  5. Maginnis v. Hartford Fire InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1911

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API