McFerran v. Chambers

Citations

• 64 Ill. 118

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence—sealed note in suit to recover for money on it by surety. In an action of assumpsit by tbe plaintiff to recover of tbe defendant money paid as bis security upon a note, it was urged tbat tbe court erred in admitting in evidence tbe note, because it was under seal: Held, tbat as tbe action was not founded upon tbe note, tbe objection was not well taken, tbe note being proper evidence on tbe question of tbe amount paid, and to whom.</p> <p>2. New trial—conflicting evidence. Where the plaintiff testified that he signed a note as the surety of the defendant alone, and one of the other makers testified that the plaintiff signed as his surety, and not that of defendant: Reid, in a suit to recover the sum the plaintiff paid thereon, the jury having found for the plaintiff, that this court could not say that the .jury found against the weight of the evidence.</p>