Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

63 Ill. 215

Ross v. Taylor

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1872

Illinois Supreme Court · decided 1872-01-15

James Steele, Judge, presiding. This was an action of debt, brought by Taylor against Ross, upon a certain written agreement. A trial was had before the court and a jury, when the following verdict was returned: “ We, the jury, find for the plaintiff, and assess his damages at $480.” To this verdict, and the form thereof, the defendant excepted, and filed his motion for a new trial, but the court overruled the motion and gave judgment on the verdict of the jury.

Relies on O'Conner v. Mullen

Decided 1872-01-15

Mr. Justice Beeese

¶1delivered the opinion of the Court:

¶2The error assigned in this case is, that the action was debt, and a verdict and judgment in damages.

¶3That this is error has been so often adjudged by this court that argument is unnecessary. It is matter of substance, and not of form. Jones v. Lloyd et al. Breese, 225 ; Jackson v. Haskell, 2 Scam. 565 ; Howell v. Barrett, 3 Gilm. 433 ; O’Conner v. Mullen, 11 Ill. 57 ; Chapman v. Wright, 20 ib. 120, and other cases.

¶4Appellee, however, insists that, if this be error, this court will give judgment in the proper form, all the evidence therefor being before it in the record, and refers to Guild et al. v. Johnson, 1 Scam. 405. That is a per curiam opinion, and no reasons assigned for so ruling.

¶5This court has, on one or more occasions, rendered such a judgment here, as the court below should have rendered. But here is a finding of a jury on which no judgment could be rendered. Frazier et al. v. Laughlin et al. 1 Gilm. 347.

¶6For this error the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded.

¶7Judgment reversed.

/63/ill/215 · .json · Public domain