Robertson v. Emerich

Decided May 10, 1900

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1900-05-10

<p>1. Bills of Particulars—Matters Not Included, When Competent in Rebuttal.—Evidence of matters not included in a bill of particulars, while not admissible for the purpose of showing a cause of action, is competent in an action on a promissory note for the purpose of rebutting proof of payment, by showing that such payment was in fact in connection with other transactions.</p>

Affirmed · Decided 1900-05-10

Mr. Presiding Justice Sears

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2The verdict is sustained by the evidence. The only conflict was upon the application of certain payments, and upon that issue we are of opinion that the evidence is ample to warrant the finding of the jury.

¶3The only question raised as to error in the rulings of the court is the admissibility of evidence of a transaction not included in the bill of particulars. But this evidence was not admitted to show a ground of action. It was merely for the purpose of rebutting the proof of payment, by showing that the payment was in fact in connection with the other transaction and not upon the notes. This was in no manner going beyond the limitations imposed by the bill of particulars, and in it there was no error.

¶4Mo other question is raised upon this record.

¶5The judgment is affirmed.