Case ID: ill-app_191/html/0274-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Carnes", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Louis F. Strawn, Appellee, v. Nicholas Vipond, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 6,003.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    Equity, g 425
      
      —when master's -findings not disturbed on appeal. In a suit to annul a judgment by confession on a promissory note and to restrain the collection of the note, on the ground that the consideration for the note was losses of the maker at gambling at defendant’s gambling house, where evidence was conflicting and the master to whom the cause was referred found for the complainant, after hearing the witnesses, his conclusion that the weight of the testimony was in favor of complainant will not be disturbed, in the absence of a showing that he erred therein.
    
      Appeal from the Circuit Court of Livingston county; the Hon. George W. Patton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1914.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed January 6, 1915.
    Statement of the Case.
    Bill in equity by Louis F. Strawn against Nicholas Vipond to annul a judgment by confession on a promissory note given by complainant to defendant and to restrain the collection of the note on the ground that the only consideration therefor was losses at gambling at defendant’s saloon and gambling house.
    The cause was referred to a master in chancery to . take evidence and report his conclusions;
    The master found the allegations of the bill true and recommended a decree for complainant.
    Objections and exceptions were filed and overruled by the master and the chancellor, and a decree for complainant was entered in accordance with the master’s findings and recommendations.
    From the decree, defendant prosecutes this appeal.
    A. W. Allen and McDougall & Chapman, for appellant.
    Louis F. Strawn, pro se.
    
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Presiding Justice Carnes

delivered the opinion of the court.