Case Name: Carl Schwarze v. Henry Sierks
Court: Illinois Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1895-01-10
Citations: 57 Ill. App. 215
Docket Number: 
Parties: Carl Schwarze v. Henry Sierks.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Appellate Court Reports
Volume: 57
Pages: 215–216

Head Matter:
Carl Schwarze v. Henry Sierks.
1. Questions of Fact—For the Jury.—Questions of fact are for the determination of the jury.
Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Righakd S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding.
Affirmed.
Opinion filed January 10, 1895.
Statement of the Case.
This is a suit commenced by appellee against appellant before a justice of the peace, and brought by appeal to the Circuit Court, upon a balance claimed to be due on a contract between appellant and appellee, the terms of which provided that appellee should render services as an architect in and about the construction of a certain block of buildings, in consideration of which services appellee should receive two and one-half per cent of the entire cost of such buildings. It is claimed by appellant that this contract, after being executed, was superseded by a new agreement which provided that instead of appellant receiving two and one-half per cent, he should receive the agreed sum of 0350, The issues were found against appellant for the full amount of appellee’s claim, $200.
Kraft, Williams & Kraft, attorneys for appellant.
George W. Plummer, attorney for appellee.

Opinion:
Mr. Presiding Justice Waterman
delivered the opinion of the Court.
We see no sufficient reason for interfering with the verdict y>f the jury upon the question of fact. The burden of proof under the contention of appellant was upon him, and we fail to find .any preponderance of the evidence in his favor. While we do not approve of the argument made by counsel for appellee in his address to the jury nor of the comments of the court thereon, yet we can not therefor reverse the judgment rendered, it being under the evidence no more than what the plaintiff was fairly entitled to, and it is therefore affirmed.