Legal Opinion · Dissent

Haizen v. Yellow Cab Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided May 13, 1963No. Gen. 48,619Published

1Dissent

ENGLISH, J,

dissenting:

I must dissent for a number of reasons.

This court’s opinion reverses the trial court’s judgment (and the jury’s verdict) as to damages, because the majority have become convinced — presumably by the manifest weight of the evidence — that the damages awarded were inadequate. For this court thus to have considered and weighed the evidence, a proper record of the testimony must first have been presented. This was not done.

Rule 1 of this court (the same, in substance, as Rule 36 of the Supreme Court) provides for preserving evidence questions by the filing of a report of…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Paul Harris Furniture Co. v. MorseIllinois Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Charles E. Harding Co. v. HardingIllinois Supreme Court · 1933
  3. City of Elmhurst v. KegerreisIllinois Supreme Court · 1945
  4. McCottrell v. BensonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1961
  5. Romines v. Illinois Motor Freight, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1959

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API