Hirsch v. Hirsch

Decided November 30, 1896

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1896-11-30

<p>1. Equity Practice—When a Decree will not be Disturbed on Appeal.—The decision of a chancellor who heard and saw the witnesses will not be disturbed on appeal where the evidence is voluminous, conflicting and irreconcilable.</p>

Relies on Duberstein v. Duberstein · Jenkins v. Cohen

Affirmed · Decided 1896-11-30

Mr. Justice Gary

¶1delivered the opinion oe the Court.

¶2These parties are husband and wife.

¶3She filed a bill for separate maintenance, and he a cross-bill for a divorce. The court sustained the first, granting a separate maintenance and solicitor’s fees, upon the amount of which no question is made in appellant’s brief, and dismissed the cross-bill.

¶4We are now asked to reverse the decision of the chancellor who saw and heard the witnesses, whose conflicting and irreconcilable testimony fills nearly two hundred pages of this record. This can not be done without violating established rules, and the decree is affirmed. Jenkins v. Cohen, 138 Ill. 634; Barrows v. Barrows, Ibid. 649; Duberstein v. Duberstein, 66 Ill. App. 579.