Case ID: ill-app_66/html/0305-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Gary", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Hickey & Spieker Co. v. W. S. Bailey.
    1. Trials by the Court—Findings Conclusive.— The findings of the judge when trying a case without a jury, is as a general rule conclusive upon questions of fact.
    Assumpsit, upon a check, etc. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook-County; the Hon. Charles GK Neely, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March terra, 1896.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 29, 1896.
    Winters & Jackson, attorneys for appellant.
    M. L. Thaokaberry, attorney for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gary

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The.first complaint of the appellant is that the motion to-get this case off the “ Short Cause Calendar ” was denied; but while the record does show very strenuous efforts to get the cause off, it does not show that it was ever on such calendar.

The suit is upon a check, given by appellant to Alex. W. Winter, and payment stopped by appellant. Winter indorsed it to appellee, but his title is conceded to be only the same as Winter’s.

The consideration of the check was commissions supposed to have been earned by Winter. There was conflicting evidence as to whether the commissions were earned, upon which the finding of the judge, trying the case without a jury, is conclusive; also a question whether Winter was entitled to commissions'—he having no broker’s license, upon which the evidence was not sufficient to take the case out of the principle of O’Neil v. Sinclair, 54 Ill. App. 298; 153 Ill. 525.

The judgment is affirmed.