Case ID: ill-app_188/html/0550-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Smith", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Gust Anderson, Plaintiff in Error.
    Gen. No. 20,156.
    (Not to he reported in full.)
    Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Edwabb T. Wade, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1914.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 6, 1914.
    Statement of the Case.
    Complainant in the Municipal Court of Chicago by the People of the State of Illinois against Gust Anderson, charging defendant with assault and battery on Jonas Olson. To reverse a judgment finding defendant guilty, imposing a fine of $100 and costs, and committing him to the House of Correction until the fine and costs are paid or worked out at the rate of $1.50 per day, defendant prosecutes a writ of error.
    Hector A. Brouillet, for plaintiff in error.
    Maclay Hoyne and Edward E. Wilson, for defendant in error; Joseph R. Fahy, of counsel.
    
      Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Assault and battery, § 31
      
      —where proof of name of injured, party sufficient. A conviction for assault and battery held sustained by proof in the record of the name of the injured party, where it appeared that Anna Olson made the complaint charging the defendant with assault on Jonas Olson, and the evidence in the record shows that Jonas Olson was the husband of the complaining witness and the party who was struck and injured.
    2. Assault and battery, § 36*—when judgment of conviction not improper. A judgment finding defendant guilty of assault and battery held not subject to the objection that it required defendant to pay money to the injured party, where the record did not so show, it appearing that the court attempted to induce defendant to pay the injured party’s doctor bill, etc., but the proposition was later rejected.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.