Crozier v. Cooper
Illinois Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit by the appellee against the appellant. The declaration contains the common counts for work and labor, goods sold and delivered, and the money counts. Plea, general issue and set-off. Issue joined, verdict and judgment for the plaintiff below. The defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit by the appellee against the appellant. The declaration contains the common counts for work and labor, goods sold and delivered, and the money counts. Plea, general issue and set-off. Issue joined, verdict and judgment for the plaintiff below. The defendant appealed. The cause was heard before Minsk all, Judge, at September term, 1852. On the trial of the cause in the court below, the plaintiff proved, by one Benjamin Sigsworth, the hauling of two loads of goods, from Sacramento city to defendant’s store, at the junction of the north and middle forks of American…
1Opinion of the CourtTreat, C. J.
To authorize a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, it must appear that the evidence has been discovered since the trial, and that it could not have been produced on the trial by the use of reasonable diligence. The evidence must also be material to the issue, and relate to the merits of the case. And it must not be cumulative, nor go to impeach the character of a witness. These principles are too well settled to require a reference to authorities. There is a fatal defect in the application made in this case. It does not appear but that the defendant, by the exercise of due…
2Cited by22 opinions
- Hines v. DriverIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Graham v. HagmannIllinois Supreme Court · 1915
- Chandler v. DuganWyoming Supreme Court · 1952
- Durham v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1922
- People v. JohnsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1918
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.