Emery v. Hoyt
Illinois Supreme Court
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Henry county; the Hon. Ira O. Wilkinson, Judge, presiding. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by John Emery against E. C. Hoyt, conservator of Samuel Reynolds, to recover the amount of a promissory note executed by Samuel Reynolds, for §1,000, bearing date, April 24th, 1866. The defendant filed a plea of non assumpsit.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Henry county; the Hon. Ira O. Wilkinson, Judge, presiding. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by John Emery against E. C. Hoyt, conservator of Samuel Reynolds, to recover the amount of a promissory note executed by Samuel Reynolds, for §1,000, bearing date, April 24th, 1866. The defendant filed a plea of non assumpsit. The parties stipulated that the defendant might give in evidence, under the general issue, any fact which he could under any plea properly pleaded. The main defense relied upon was the insanity of the maker of the note at the date of its…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Breese
In cases of insanity, where much evidence is heard on both sides, as in this case, the affirmative testimony of those best acquainted with the person alleged to be insane, the testimony of experts not being in the case, should outweigh the testimony of those who, at or about the time of the act sought to be avoided on the plea of insanity, had interviews with him and testify they saw nothing indicating an insane núnd. The one is strong affirmative testimony, coming from a reliable quarter, while the other partakes of the nature of negative testimony, and by persons not in a position so…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Johnson v. Pilot Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- McAllister v. RowlandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- James White Memorial Home v. HaegIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
- Turley v. TurleyIllinois Supreme Court · 1940
- Rawson v. HardyUtah Supreme Court · 1935
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.