Case Name: Eliza A. Page v. Northwestern Brewing Co.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1894-04-19
Citations: 54 Ill. App. 157
Docket Number: 
Parties: Eliza A. Page v. Northwestern Brewing Co.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Appellate Court Reports
Volume: 54
Pages: 157–159

Head Matter:
Eliza A. Page v. Northwestern Brewing Co.
1. Bills of Exceptions—Exhibits in Evidence.—To make exhibits offered in evidence a part of the record, they must be incorporated into the bill of exceptions with proper words of identification.
Memorandum.—Error to the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Thomas Gr. Windes, Judge, presiding.
Heard in this court at the March term, 1894,
and affirmed.
Opinion filed April 19, 1894.
Opinion on rehearing filed May 8, 1894.
The opinion states the case.
Stirlen & King, attorneys for the plaintiff in error.
Lackner & Butz, attorneys for defendant in error.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Gary
delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case is governed by Spangenberg v. Charles, 44 Ill. App. 526.
The bill of exceptions recites, " I offer this lease in evidence. The same was thereupon received in evidence, and marked Exhibit. A." " I offer these receipts in evidence, being numbers 134 and 135, each dated March 25, 1893, each for the sum of $50, and the same were therefore received in evidence and marked defendant's Exhibits A and B." Similar language is used as to other exhibits down to " I."
At the close of the evidence is inserted: " Which was all the evidence offered or received on said hearing." Then follow some propositions of law and the action upon them. Then without further -words of identity, next preceding the finding by the court—there being no jury—are inserted several sheets, corresponding in description with the recitals in the bill. It is a plausible, indeed a reasonable, inference, that these sheets are the exhibits referred to by the bill; but there is no statement in the bill that they are in fact the same. Whatever against the interest of the plaintiff in error may be true, and not deny the statements of the bill, is to be presumed to be true. Matson v. Lally, 37 Ill. App. 484.
It is upon this doctrine that bills of exceptions, in cases where this court is asked to review findings or verdicts upon the evidence, must state that they contain all the evidence; or if the refusal of instructions is complained of, that the bills must state that they contain all that were given.
The judgment is affirmed.