Lowman v. Aubery

Citations

• 72 Ill. 619

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence—proof of the execution of note sued on. Where the defendant admits, in open court, that his signature to the note sued on is genuine, and no alteration appears upon its face, the note is properly admissible in evidence, under a plea of non est factum, verified by affidavit, without further proof.</p> <p>2. Alteration—when not apparent, must he shown hy the pwty alleging it. Where the execution of a promissory note is put in issue by plea, verified by affidavit, and the defendant admits that the name signed thereto is his signature, it is not incumbent on the plaintiff to show that the note has not been altered, where no alteration is apparent on its face, to admit the same in evidence, but the defendant must show that fact in defense.</p> <p>3. Costs in Supreme Court—remittitur. Where judgment is taken for too large a sum, and, on appeal by the defendant to this court, the appellee, after the cause is submitted, enters a remittitw of the excess, if this is the only error, the judgment will he affirmed at the costs of the appellee.</p> <p>4. Witness—in suit hy administrators. In a suit by administrators of an estate, upon a note given to their intestate in his lifetime, neither of the defendants is a competent witness on the question of an alleged alteration of the note by the deceased, even though one of them is only a surety for the other.</p>