Baird v. Trustees of Schools

Citations

• 106 Ill. 657
• 1883 Ill. LEXIS 218

Syllabus

<p>1. Appeal—reviewing controverted questions of fact. In an action on a note given by a defaulting school treasurer, and others, to secure the deficit in his accounts, it is purely a question of fact whether the others executed the note as sureties for its payment, or in discharge of their supposed liability as sureties on his official bond, and when the jury find such others liable as sureties on the note, and the judgment of the court on the verdict is affirmed by the Appellate Court, such finding of fact is conclusive on this court, and the evidence can only be looked into to see if the trial court erred in giving or refusing instructions.</p> <p>2. Surety—whether that relation exists. Where a late school treasurer was found to be in default, and the trustees of schools were willing to take notes, with security, for the sum due the school fund, and notes were accordingly drawn and executed by the treasurer, who took them to the sureties on his bond, and they signed the same, there being no fraud practiced on them to induce them to execute the notes, it was held, that their relation to the principal was that of sureties, and nothing else.</p> <p>3. Instructions—need not be repeated. There is no error in refusing instructions, every principle of law in which, applicable to the issues, are contained in others given for the same party. Nor will a judgment evidently just and proper be disturbed for slight errors in the instructions given.</p>