Case ID: ill-app_188/html/0267-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Eldredge", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

S. J. Danskin, Administrator, Appellant, v. Margaret A. Denny and John J. Denny, Appellees.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    Bills and notes, § 441
      
      —when finding as to execution sustained by the evidence. In an action on a promissory note where pleas were filed, with an affidavit denying the execution of the note, held that a verdict for defendant on conflicting evidence as to the execution of the note would not be disturbed on the ground that the clear preponderance of the evidence showed that defendants signed the note.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. James A. Creighton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1913.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 2, 1914.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by S. J. Danskin, administrator with the will annexed of Karl D. Danskin, deceased, against Margaret A. Denny and John J. Denny, on a promissory note for the principal sum of thirty-three hundred dollars, dated at Hillsboro, NT. D., purporting to be executed by defendants and made payable to Brown-, Danskin Company. Plaintiff sues as administrator of the assignee of the note. Defendants filed several pleas including the general issue, with an affidavit denying the execution of the note. The jury returned a verdict in favor of defendants and judgment was rendered on the .verdict. To reverse the judgment, plaintiff appeals.
    B. O. Willard, W. St. J. Wines and Clayton J. Barber, for appellant.
    E. L. Chapin, for appellees.
    
      
       See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, .same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.