text:
    Belleville Savings Bank, Appellee, v. John Souris, Appellant.

      Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    B. E. Costello, E. H. Schwarzenbach and Josiah Whitnel, for appellant.
    Turner & Holder and F. J. Tecklenburg, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Barry

delivered the opinion of the court.

Belleville Savings Bank, trustee, filed a bill to foreclose two mortgages on the same pieces of real estate, and made appellant and others defendants thereto. Appellant answered denying that such mortgages “are superior liens upon the premises to that of said defendant,” and averring that he is in possession of the mortgaged premises as tenant and has paid the owner of the equity of redemption rent in advance to the amount of $12,000 for which he is entitled to credit. The fair purport of the answer in that regard is that appellant had paid rent in advance for which he is entitled to a lien that is superior to the lien of the mortgages.

One of the mortgages sought to be foreclosed was executed and delivered on May 3, 1928, and was recorded two days later. The lease under which appellant claims is dated May 1, 1929. A mortgagor, or his grantee, cannot make a lease of mortgaged premises which will give the lessee a greater right than the mortgagor possesses, and that will interfere with the right of the mortgagee to enter for condition broken. Gartside v. Outlay, 58 Ill. 210, 211; Taylor v. Adams, 115 Ill. 570.

If a person accepts a lease of mortgaged premises and a receiver is appointed in foreclosure proceedings, the lessee must pay rent to the receiver from the day of his appointment or vacate the premises. If he has paid the mortgagor .rent in advance he will be required to pay rent to the receiver from the date of his appointment if he remains in possession. Rohrer v. Deatherage, 336 Ill. 450; McDevitt v. Sullivan, 8 Cal. 592; Hatch v. Sykes, 64 Miss. 307, 1 So. 248; Olive v. Levy, 194 N. Y. S. 88. In the case at bar a receiver was appointed. We know of no law that would give appellant a lien for rent paid in advance that would be superior to the lien of a mortgage that was of record at the time he secured his lease. For that reason the amount of the rent paid in advance was wholly immaterial.

The only other defense set up in appellant’s answer is that he is a lessee in possession of a portion of the premises and that his right to possession is superior to any rights of the complainant. We have shown that his right to possession under the lease was not superior to the right of the complainant under the mortgage of May 3, 1928. If appellant thought his right to possession was superior to the rights of complainant under its second mortgage, he should have made it an issue instead of averring that it was superior to any rights of the complainant. A defendant cannot avail himself of any defense not stated in his answer even though it appears in the evidence. Millard v. Millard, 221 Ill. 86.

In his objections and exceptions to the master’s report appellant averred that the master erred in finding that complainant’s mortgages are superior to his claim when all the evidence shows that the mortgages are second to his lien. It is apparent that the claim referred to is his claim for rent for which he had no lien. He did not specifically raise the question before the master or the court as to whether his right of possession under his lease was superior to the lien of complainant’s second mortgage and is in no position to urge it in this court. Arthur Eidman, trustee, was a defendant to the bill and set up in his answer that he held a third mortgage on the same premises. Appellant made no reference whatever to that mortgage in his answer and is in no position to urge error with reference thereto.

Appellant argues that the court erred in not decreeing that the premises for which he has no lease should be first sold. That question was not raised by his answer or by his objections and exceptions to the master’s report. He also argues that the master erred in admitting certain evidence but having assigned no error in that regard the question is not open for our consideration. Finding no reversible error the decree is affirmed.

Affirmed.


source: Caselaw Access Project

author: Mr. Justice Edwards

license: Public Domain

text:
    Stolze Lumber Company, Appellant, v. J. H. Oglesby et al., Appellees.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Warnock, Williamson & Burroughs, for appellant.

      C. C. Ellison, for appellees.
   Mr. Justice Edwards

delivered the opinion of the court.

On May 20, 1930, John Smoot entered into a contract with J. H. Oglesby and A. D. Oglesby, contractors, to erect for him a dwelling house, for the contract' price of $2,710. The house was built, and it appears that the owner paid to the contractors in the neighborhood of $220 to apply on the cost price. Appellant, as a subcontractor, furnished to the original contractors materials used in the building, to the value of $1,468.43, and on Nov. 18, 1930, served upon the owner the statutory notice of its claim. Certain other subcontractors furnished materials and labor, which went into the construction of the house, to the amount of $838.30. It does not appear that the general contractors gave to the owner any statement, under oath, as to the claims of subcontractors, nor is it shown that any of them, except appellant, served the owner with the required notice of claim.

The owner negotiated with appellee, Home Building & Loan Association, to secure a loan on the premises, and it was agreed that such a loan, in the sum of $1,500, would be made, to be secured by a first mortgage. The papers therefor were executed, but the consummation of the deal was held up pending a conference of the interested parties.

On December 23, 1930, a meeting was held at the office of appellee, Home Building & Loan Association, between J. H. Oglesby, Smoot, the owner, R. P. Harris, secretary of said appellee, and Alvin A. Stolze, secretary of appellant. It was then agreed by said parties ■that the appellee was to perfect its loan to Smoot, in the sum of $1,500, and to have a first mortgage on the premises securing same; that of the proceeds of such loan, $100 was to be paid to the general contractors, $610.80 to appellant, and the balance to the other subcontractors in full of their claims; that the general contractors should take from the owner and his wife, an ordinary promissory note in the sum of $926.80, without mortgage security, and that appellant was to have a note for the balance due it, or $857.63, secured by a second mortgage upon said property. It was understood and agreed by the parties that the Building & Loan Association was not to disburse any of the $1,500 until all the papers agreed to had been properly executed.

On the same day, J. H. Oglesby left the conference and in violation of the agreement procured from the owner a judgment note for $926.80, secured by a mortgage on the house and lot, which he at once filed for record. He then went to the office of appellee association, exhibited the note, and Harris thereupon mailed to appellant a check for $610.80, and to the other subcontractors checks in full of their claims. Harris testified that when Oglesby came to the office, he called Stolze by telephone, and in the presence and hearing of both Oglesby and William Peek, who was present at the time, requested permission to complete the transaction. He further stated that Stolze replied to the effect that if Oglesby had taken a note from Smoot, of the kind agreed upon, it would be satisfactory. Stolze denies that such conversation occurred. Both Oglesby and Peek say that Harris, while they were present, did not call up Stolze, as he claimed.

We think the weight of the evidence establishes the fact that Harris did not telephone Stolze, and that the latter did not know of the matter until the following day, when the check was received through the mail; whereupon Stolze telephoned Harris, expressing surprise, and stating that if investigation found the Oglesby note was in accord with the agreement, it would be satisfactory, otherwise it would not be ratified.

Stolze then took a note and mortgage from Smoot and wife, with the express understanding that if the Oglesby note was in conformity with the contract, the note and mortgage would be retained; otherwise returned to them. He then investigated, found that Oglesby had taken a judgment note, in violation of his agreement, same secured by a mortgage which he filed for record, and had assigned the note to his mother-in-law. Upon learning these facts, he returned the note and mortgage to Smoot, and the check to the appellee, Building & Loan Association.

Appellant filed its bill to foreclose its lien; the appellee association answered the bill, denying the right to a lien, setting forth the above-mentioned agreement, and averring that as a consequence it was entitled to a first lien upon the premises. The appellee also filed its cross-bill, alleging substantially as in its answer, and in addition, that its mortgage created a lien superior to that of the mortgage obtained by Oglesby from Smoot. Appellant answered the cross-bill, denying that the lien of either mortgage was prior to that of its mechanic’s lien.

After reference to a master, and a hearing before the court upon the master’s report, the chancellor sustained exceptions filed thereto, and entered a decree which found that the appellee’s mortgage was a first lien upon the premises, that the lien of appellant was junior to that of appellee, and that the Oglesby mortgage was a third lien upon the house and lot; further decreeing a sale of the property, and disbursement of the proceeds, after payment of costs, in accord with the rights of the parties as found by said decree.

The appellee, Building & Loan Association, takes the ground that appellant waived its claim to a lien, as against it. It is conceded that the agreement above referred to was entered into by the parties. At that time appellant manifestly had perfected its lien, which it was in position to enforce, and it only agreed to relinquish same upon the performance, by the other parties, of acts by them to be severally kept and performed.

An agreement by one who has a mechanic’s lien, to relinquish same, when certain conditions or terms are fulfilled, will not impair the lien, nor amount to a waiver of same, if the conditions or terms are broken or not performed. Gardner v. Hall, 29 Ill. 277; McMurray v. Brown, 91 U. S. 257; Miller Lumber Co. v. Meyer, 183 Wis. 360, 196 N. W. 840; Baumhoff v. St. Louis & K. R. Co., 171 Mo. 120, 71 S. W. 156. The conditions under which appellant agreed to waive its lien were not kept; on the contrary, were broken; hence under the rule as stated, its lien was not waived or destroyed.

It is further urged that even though the waiver were not proven, still the decree does full equity as between the parties. The argument is made that numerous other subcontractors held claims; that if they were enforced, appellant, being required to pro rate with them out of the proceeds of sale of the premises, would be in little better position than as ordered by the decree. As previously observed, the record is devoid of any evidence that the general contractors had furnished the owner with a sworn statement as to materialmen and laborers having claims. There is no testimony that any subcontractors, except appellant, had served notice of claims upon the owner. Unless such sworn statement is thus made, or such notice is served, the party having such claim does not acquire a lien. Liese v. Hentze, 326 Ill. 633.

Upon this record, as made, it does not appear other than that appellant was the only subcontractor who had, or was in position to enforce, a lien. It cannot well be said, in such situation, that the decree has not altered appellant’s position to its prejudice.

In our opinion the proof establishes that appellee association paid the claims of the other subcontractors before the terms of the agreement were fulfilled, and without the permission of appellant. Its conduct in making such payments was not warranted, and it must bear the consequences of its voluntary unauthorized acts.

The court erred in holding that appellant’s lien was subordinate to that created by the mortgage of appellee, Home Building & Loan Association. The decree is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to enter a decree in accord with the views herein expressed.

Reversed and remanded with directions.


text:
    John Barwick for use of Mrs. A. P. Lager, Appellee, v. Westchester Fire Insurance Company of New York, Appellant.

      Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Stone & Fowler, for appellant.
    A. D. Morgan and Denison & Spiller, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Edwards

delivered the opinion of the court.

John Barwick, the vendee in a contract for the sale of a farm in Williamson county, owned1 by Mrs. A. P. Lager, on April 21,1925, took out a policy of insurance, in his own name, on the dwelling house upon such land, in the sum of $1,500, with the Westchester Fire Insurance Company, appellant herein. The policy was procured and paid for by Barwick. On June 19, 1925, the amount of the risk was reduced to $1,250, evidenced by a rider attached to the policy. Mrs. Lager is not referred to in the body of the policy; however, in a rider attached thereto, appeared the following: “Notice is received and accepted that the within described property has been sold on contract, loss, if any, payable to Mrs. A. P. Lager and John Barwick, as their interest may appear, subject to all the terms of this policy.”

One condition of the policy was stated: “If now or hereafter there be other insurance, whether valid or not, on any property hereby insured, . . . then and in such case this entire policy shall be void, unless otherwise provided by agreement endorsed hereon.”

On April 20, 1926, the dwelling house covered by such indemnity was totally destroyed by fire. The insurer disclaimed any liability, and this suit was instituted in the name of Barwiek for the use of Mrs. Lager.

The declaration was twice amended to meet objections raised thereto by demurrer, after which the insurance company pleaded the general issue, and several special pleas, to all of which latter the plaintiff demurred, and the court having sustained the demurrers, defendant elected to stand by its pleas. There was a trial before a jury, a verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $1,564.21, upon which the court rendered judgment, and this appeal has been perfected to reverse the same. By a proper assignment of error the defendant below, appellant here, questions the ruling of the trial court in sustaining demurrers to the special pleas.

The fourth of such pleas sets out the provision of the policy above quoted, which avoids the contract if other insurance should be placed on the insured premises, except by agreement indorsed thereon, and further averred that Barwiek, on September 2,1925, without the consent or knowledge of the insurer, took out other insurance on the dwelling house, in the sum of $500, through a policy issued to him by the National Union Fire Insurance Company, for the period of five years; that such action was contrary to the provisions of the policy sued upon, and in consequence the contract of insurance thereby became void.

In determining whether the plea presented a defense to the action, it is necessary to refer to the policy, whose terms are clear and unambiguous, to ascertain who was thereby insured, and whose interest was in fact indemnified against loss.

The policy provided that the appellant “does insure John Barwick for the term of five years.” He procured the insurance and paid the premium. It is therefore apparent that Barwick was the party insured, unless the effect of the loss payable clause, set out in the attached rider, was to indemnify the interest of Mrs. Lager.

Similar clauses have been construed, where the payee has been vendor, mortgagee and creditor, and the decided weight of authority is that where the clause, in substance, provides that the loss, if any, is .payable to a specified third party, and there are no further provisions in the policy or payment clause, creating a different relation, such person is not a party to the contract, and the clause does not amount to an insurance of the payee’s interest in the property. The party designated is merely an appointee to receive the sum which might be recovered by the insured in case of loss, to the extent of the appointee’s interest therein. The payee has no direct rights against the insurer, but recovers, if at all, solely in the right of the insured, and only when the latter has a valid and enforceable demand under the policy.

The clause, in effect, is the covenant of the insurer to pay to the appointee any loss to which the insured might be entitled by virtue of the contract, to the extent of the payee’s interest. Continental Ins. Co. v. Hulman & Cox, 92 Ill. 145; Auto Owners’ Protective Exchange v. Edwards (Ind. App.), 136 N. E. 577; Coffin v. Northwestern Mut. Fire Ass’n (Idaho), 249 Pac. 89; Franklin Savings Institution v. Central Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 119 Mass. 240; Rankin v. Amazon Ins. Co., 89 Cal. 203, 26 Pac. 872; 26 Corpus Juris, 273.

Hence it seems clear that the contract here sued upon did not insure any interest of Mrs. Lager, and that she can only recover, as a designated payee, if a right of recovery existed as to Barwick.

Moreover, it has been uniformly held that a loss payable clause, such as the one in question, places the indemnity of the appointee at the risk of every act and omission of the insured that would void, terminate or adversely affect the insurance of the latter’s interest under the policy, and that if the insured is guilty of some breach of the covenants or clauses of the contract, which the policy stipulates shall avoid the insurance, so that the loss is not collectible by him, it likewise will prevent the appointee from recovering upon the loss payable clause. Continental Ins. Co. v. Hulman & Cox, supra; Delaware Ins. Co. v. Greer, 120 Fed. 916; Keith v. Royal Ins. Co., 117 Wis. 531, 94 N. W. 295; 14 Ruling Case Law, 1084.

Under the rule as stated, it is manifest that Mrs. Lager had a right of recovery, only if such right existed in Barwick, and if the latter had by violation of the terms of the policy forfeited his right to collect for a loss sustained, then no claim therefor remained in Mrs. Lager.

The plea averred that Barwick had violated the condition of the policy, which prohibited taking out other insurance without the agreement of the insurer. By the terms of the contract, such action avoided his right to indemnity for any loss sustained. This defense, if proven, barred a recovery as against the insured, and under the rule of the authorities cited, would likewise preclude Mrs. Lager from maintaining her action. The plea presented a defense to the suit, and the court erred in sustaining the demurrer thereto.

Appellant has raised other questions. However, in view of our conclusion upon the foregoing assignment of error, we do not deem it necessary to discuss them.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to overrule the demurrer to appellant’s fourth plea.

Beversed and remanded with directions.


author: Mr. Justice Fulton

text:
    The First National Bank of Granite City, Illinois, Appellant, v. Charles L. Draper, Appellee.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Joseph C. Steele and Warnock, Williamson & Burroughs, for appellant.
    R. W. Griffith and Wesley Lueders, for appellee, '
   Mr. Justice Fulton

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of Madison county in bar of the action and for costs in a suit in assumpsit on a judgment note.

The First National Bank of Granite City, appellant, on September 24,1930, obtained judgment by confession against the appellee, Charles L. Draper, in the circuit court of Madison county for $4,530.35.

On motion of appellee, the judgment was thereafter opened, appellee given leave to plead, the judgment to stand as security and a trial had on the merits. The jury found in favor of the appellee, motion for new trial was denied and judgment rendered in favor of appellee in bar of action and for costs.

Appellee filed a plea of non assumpsit and four special pleas. The first special plea alleged that the execution of the note sued upon was made solely for the accommodation of the appellant bank and without any valuable consideration. .

The second special plea alleged that the execution of the note was made solely for the accommodation of appellant bank and Bethel & Son, a corporation, at the request of appellant and without a valuable consideration.

The third special plea alleged that prior to the ex-' ecution of the note, Bethel & Son, who were indebted to appellant in the sum of about $20,000, sought an additional loan of $5,000 from appellant; that appellant feared such additional loan would not meet the approval of the bank examiner; that appellee at the special instance and request of appellant became accommodation maker of a $5,000 note for the accommodation of appellant bank; that renewal notes were executed from time to time; that appellant accepted the note from appellee as accommodation maker, and not otherwise; that appellee was not indebted to said bank or to Bethel & Son and received no valuable consideration for said note.

The fourth special plea alleged similar matters and that there was a conditional deliver^ of the note in question; that the condition had totally failed and that thereby appellee was released and discharged from payment.

The substantial facts show that in July, 1928, a certain contracting firm in Granite City, by the name of Bethel & Son, was indebted to appellant bank in the approximate sum of $20,000 on unsecured notes. Bethel & Son had under construction two rather large building contracts with the State of Illinois, one at Kankakee and one at Charleston, upon which the State was withholding a portion of the contract price. The contractors were needing additional funds to carry on the work and to meet their payrolls and applied to appellant bank for an additional loan of $5,000. They were told by Guy L. Tetherington, the president of appellant bank, that the amount of their indebtedness equaled the limit which the bank was permitted to loan any one borrower, and that the loans to Bethel & Son had been criticized by the bank examiner. From this point on the testimony is in conflict. Bethel testifies that in conference with Tetherington the latter suggested getting someone else to sign the note and that Bethel then suggested the name of appellee.

Tetherington testified that he refused to make the additional loan to Bethel & Son, and that after the refusal Bethel wanted to know if he would make the loan to appellee, which Tetherington agreed to do. The appellee, Charles L. Draper, was then brought into the bank for conference with Bethel and Tetherington. He testifies that in this conversation Tetherington was asked by Bethel to explain the situation the construction company was in regarding the raising of more capital to complete their building contracts with the State. Thereupon Tetherington told Draper about the state of Bethel & Son’s bank account; that he had made investigations at Springfield through the State officials and ascertained the amount of money necessary to complete the State contracts; that the appellant had already loaned Bethel & Son all they were allowed to loan; that there would be plenty of money coming from the contracts to pay off all the material bills and subcontractors, and also enough to pay off the loans made at appellant bank; that the only way appellant could loan Bethel any further sum would be to get somebody else to sign the note, as the bank examiner wouldn’t allow the appellant to use Bethel’s name on any further paper; that if he, Draper, would sign the note there would be no liability attached to it and no interest for him to pay; that the money coming in from the State funds, after the subcontractors and material bills were paid off, would be applied to pay off the Draper note.

Draper further testified that, after this explanation and assurances from Tetherington, he signed the note. He received none of the $5,000; he renewed the note several times, but never paid any interest; never saw the cashier’s check for $5,000 issued in his name at the time the note was executed; never indorsed the check; did not have an account with appellant bank and upon inquiry several times when the note was renewed was told that payment from the State jobs had been delayed.

Appellee is corroborated by Joseph Bethel as to the conversation at the bank. Bethel states further that during the conference Draper said to Tetherington, “Well, now, if I sign this note, Mr. Tetherington, will you see that it is paid from the first funds received from the State jobs?” And Mr. Tetherington said that he would, and that the note would be satisfied from the first funds received from the State after the material bills and labor bills had been paid.

Tethering!on on the witness stand insisted that he made it clear that the note would be the obligation of appellee alone and denied telling Draper that if he signed the note he would never be called upon to pay it and would not be liable on it and also denied stating that he would see that the first funds coming to the bank from the State contracts would be applied in payment of the Draper note. He is corroborated in part by the testimony, of Nathan Fleischman, chairman of the board of directors of the appellant bank.

After the note was signed by appellee it was given to the cashier of the bank, who then drew a cashier’s check on appellant for $5,000, payable to the order of appellee. This check was indorsed by Bethel writing the name “Charles L. Draper” on the back and then he delivered the check back to the bank and Bethel & Son were given credit for the amount of same.

Appellant had made arrangement with the State so that all checks to Bethel & Son, for work done on the State contracts, were forwarded to the appellant bank, although payable to the contractors. A large part of the indebtedness due the bank from Bethel & Son was paid from these checks and $1,000 paid on the Draper note. Later on the appellant bank was consolidated with the Granite City National Bank and demand made on Draper to pay the note.

It is the contention of appellant that the loan in question was made to appellee, Draper; that the obligation was his direct obligation and that he was the party of primary liability thereon. Under these circumstances appellant insists it was error to permit oral proof by appellee as to the mode of payment of the note, or that he was not to be liable on the note and would not be called upon to pay it, and that the admission of such proof was only an attempt to change and qualify the unconditional written promises by a contemporaneons parol agreement, in violation of the general rule that an instrument on its face cannot be shown by parol to be conditional.

We do not feel that the cases cited by appellant fit the facts or control the questions in this case. In the case of Handley v. Drum, 237 Ill. App. 587, the court said that while the defendants had pleaded a conditional delivery of the note in question the proof submitted did not make out the defense thus pleaded. In the case of First Nat. Bank of Beecher v. Wolf, 208 Ill. App. 283, the only attempt to show conditional delivery was on the renewal of the notes in March, 1914, and no evidence was sought to be introduced of any conversation or evidence of a conditional delivery of the original note executed in March, 1913. Other cases cited by appellant are as readily distinguished from the facts of this case.

Section 16 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, Cahill’s St. ch. 98, ¶ 36, provides as follows:

“Every contract on a negotiable instrument is incomplete and revocable until delivery of the instrument for the purpose of giving effect thereto. As between immediate parties, and as regards a remote party other than a holder in due course, the delivery, in order to be effectual, must be made either by or under the authority of the party making, drawing, accepting or indorsing, as the case may be; and in such case the delivery may be shown to have been conditional or for a special purpose only, and not for the purpose of transferring the property in the instrument. ’ ’

In Bell v. McDonald, 308 Ill. 329, in commenting upon the rule insisted upon by appellant the court said, “While this is recognized rule of general application, yet evidence that the instrument was not intended to take effect as a valid obligation until the occurrence of some future contingency is usually held admissible between the original parties and between them and those taking with notice. Such evidence, it is held, does not contradict the terms of the writing or vary its legal import but tends to show that it was never delivered as a present contract. The possession of a contract unexplained may be presumptive evidence of its delivery, and under such circumstances no alteration of the terms of the contract could be shown, but until the delivery the writing is inoperative, and the delivery upon condition does not make it operative until the condition has been complied with. Evidence of such conditional delivery does not alter or vary the contract.” Straus v. Citizens’ State Bank of Elmhurst, 164 Ill. App. 420, is to the same effect.

In this case we believe the jury were entirely warranted in finding from the testimony that the appellant bank was more than ordinarily interested in securing an additional loan for Bethel & Son, and that the president of the bank, Tetherington, by suggestion outlined the plan that was carried out; that the appellee, Draper, signed the note but that it was never delivered for the purpose of giving effect thereto as a valid, unconditional promissory note. We think the facts quite clearly show that the president of appellant bank agreed with appellee that he should not be held liable upon his note and that the same should be paid out of funds received by the bank from the State of Illinois, payable to Bethel & Son, and the appellant cannot recover on this note because of its violation of the terms of said agreement.

The judgment of the circuit court of Madison county is therefore affirmed.

Affirmed.


text:
    Belleville Enameling & Stamping Company, Appellee, v. United States Casualty Company, Appellant.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    C. E. Feirich, Farmer & Klingel, Wm. it. Gentry and George A. Schneider, for appellant.
    P. K. Johnson and W. E. Krebs, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Fulton

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an action of assumpsit on a liability insurance policy to recover amounts which appellee paid out on judgments and costs rendered against it in favor of certain employees.

The appellee is the Belleville Enameling & Stamping Company, a corporation engaged in the business of making enamel ware in the City of Belleville, Illinois. The appellant is the United States Casualty Company engaged in writing liability policies.

Certain employees of appellee brought suit against it for damages by reason of silicosis contracted while employed in appellee’s enamel plant. Judgments were obtained against appellee or compromises made in three certain cases and the losses paid in full by appellee. It is claimed by appellee that appellant is liable under the terms of the policy issued by it to appellee for the total amount paid out in satisfaction of judgments or in settlement of said suits. Liability is denied by appellant because it contends that silicosis is an occupational disease, and the policy covers only injuries caused by accident.

The case was tried before the court on a stipulation of facts, who found the issues in favor of appellee and assessed its damages at the sum of $17,539.72, which represents the total amount paid out in settlement of the silicosis suits together with interest and costs. Judgment was entered on the finding and appeal from said judgment was prosecuted to this court.

The sole question involved in this appeal is whether the loss sustained by the Belleville Enameling & Stamping Company in the three cases is covered by the terms of the liability insurance policy sued on.

Appellant issued four policies to appellee, each for a one-year period, but they are all alike so far as the purposes of this suit are concerned. The policy was termed, “Standard Workmen’s Compensation and Employers ’ Liability Policy. ’ ’ The introductory clause reads as follows: “Does hereby agree with this employer named and described as such in the declarations forming a part hereof, as respects personal injuries sustained by employes including death at any time resulting therefrom as follows”: Then follows a paragraph designated as “One (a)” which deals exclusively with claims arising under the Workmen’s Compensation Law.

Paragraph One (b) so far as applicable is as follows: “One (b) To indemnify this employer against loss by reason of the liability imposed upon him by law for damages on account of such injuries to such of said employes as are legally employed wherever such injuries may be sustained within the territorial limits of the United States or the Dominion of Canada.”

Paragraph 2 refers merely to the duty of appellant to furnish inspection.

Paragraph 3 provides for furnishing defense against claims brought against appellee.

Paragraph 4 provides for payment of costs of legal proceedings and investigations.

Paragraph 5 provides that the agreement shall apply to such injuries sustained by any person employed by the plaintiff whose entire remuneration shall be included in the total actual remuneration for which provision is made in the policy.

Paragraph 6 provides that the agreement of the policy shall apply to such injuries so sustained by reason of the business operations described in the declarations made by the plaintiff for the purpose of this insurance, including all operations necessary or incident or appurtenant thereto, wherever such operations are carried on.

Paragraph 7, about which the controversy rages, is as follows: “Seven. This agreement shall apply only to such injuries so sustained by reason of accidents occurring during the policy period limited and defined as such in Item 2 of said declarations. ’ ’

Then follows the conditions and the list of declarations of appellee. Appellant insists that the losses of appellee in the silicosis suits are not covered by said policy because it covers only such losses as are sustained by the insured (appellee) on account of personal injuries caused by accident, and that silicosis was an occupational disease and not an injury sustained by accident.

Appellee contends that in the contract of insurance appellant undertook to protect appellee against loss for all damages recovered against it by employees for personal injuries sustained in their employment. That two kinds of personal injuries are covered by the policy. First, those covered by the Workmen’s Compensation Law and second, all injuries to employees to which damages, as distinguished from compensation, are recoverable. It is conceded that silicosis is not an injury by accident, as would bring it under the terms of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, Cahill’s St. ch. 48, |f 201 et seq., but is an occupational disease contracted by persons engaged in sandblasting.

Appellee further contends that the purpose of paragraph seven is to define the time limits of the policy; that the word “accidents” in said paragraph is used in the sense of “occurrences” rather than in the more restricted sense, and that a complete consideration of all the terms of the policy shows that it was intended to cover all losses where the employer is required to pay damages on account of personal injuries to employees legally employed. Appellee cites authorities from Massachusetts and other jurisdictions in support of the claim that occupational disease is a personal injury.

Keeping in mind the argument of counsel and the well established rules of law that an insurance contract is to be interpreted by the same rules as other contracts and that where the insurance company leaves its design or meaning doubtful by the use of language that is not clear, courts will adopt a construction favorable to the insured as announced in the case of Cottingham v. National Mutual Church Ins. Co., 290 Ill. 26, and also that a contract of insurance will be construed most strongly against thé insurer, aiid after a careful reading of the provisions of this policy, we cannot interpret it to cover injuries that do not result from accident. To do so would mean the elimination and disregarding completely of paragraph seven. The policy does not in any part of the written contract contain any reference to an injury caused otherwise than by accident. Paragraph seven “That this agreement shall apply only to such injuries so sustained by reason of accidents occurring during the policy period limited and defined as such in Item 2 of said declarations” is, to our minds, of compelling influence in the interpretation of this policy on the question at issue in this case.

In order to give the policy the meaning insisted upon by appellee, it would in effect require the elimination or rewriting of paragraph seven so as to make a new contract.

Courts can only examine contracts as they are written and it seems plain to us that the policy covers what it purports to cover, that is, injuries sustained by reason of accidents.

It is our opinion that the claim of appellee for losses paid out by reason of the three silicosis cases is not covered by the policy and that the trial court erred in finding the issues for appellee, and in entering judgment against appellant.

The judgment of the circuit court of St. Clair county is therefore reversed.

Reversed.

The clerk will insert in the judgment the following: The court finds that alleged injuries from silicosis are not covered by the policy in question.


text:
    Mildred Barnhart, Appellee, v. Paul A. Goin, Appellant.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Thomas H. Creighton and Harry Anderson, for appellant.
    Thurlow Gr. Lewis and Frank E. Trobaugh, for appellee. ,
   Mr. Justice Fulton

delivered the opinion of the court.

Mildred Barnhart, appellee, recovered a judgment against Paul A. Coin, appellant, in the circuit court of Hamilton county for the sum of $1,500 for personal injuries suffered by her in an automobile accident.

The declaration contained seven counts, but the third and fourth counts were stricken at the close of plaintiff’s testimony. The first and second counts charged general negligence in the operation and management of the automobile and the driving of the same at a high rate of speed. The fifth count charged only general negligence. The sixth count charged wilful and wanton operation coupled with the charge of driving on the left side of the highway. The seventh count alleged wilful and wanton conduct along with driving at an unreasonable rate of speed.

Appellant filed a plea of not guilty. No special finding of fact was submitted to the jury and no request made by either party for the submission of same. The court rendered judgment on the general verdict and included in the judgment order that the injuries sustained by the plaintiff were wilfully and wantonly and maliciously inflicted as charged in the declaration.

It is insisted by appellant that the court erred in refusing to direct a verdict on the wilful and wanton counts, motion to that effect having been made at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence, but not renewed at the close of all the evidence.

It is contended that the evidence fails to sustain said counts and there being a general verdict, the judgment must be reversed.

As we'understand the rule, in order to save the question of the sufficiency of the evidence, it is necessary to make the motion to direct a verdict at the close of all the evidence. In this case the appellant should have renewed his motion to direct a verdict on the wilful and wanton counts of the declaration, at the conclusion of all the testimony. The motion was properly made at the close of the plaintiff’s testimony and denied by-the court, but the right of appellant to assign error on the overruling of such motion was waived when he introduced evidence in defense of the case. Central Ry. Co. v. Knowles, 191 Ill. 241; Chicago, B. & Q. Ry. Co. v. Pollock, 195 Ill. 156; Morris & Co. v. Rhode Island Ins. Co. of Providence, 181 Ill. App. 500.

It is further insisted that the court erred in its rulings on the instructions. Appellee’s first given instruction was as follows: “This case is one which is civil in its nature, and the degree of proof which the law requires in order to justify a verdict for the plaintiff is not so great as it is in a criminal case; that is, the plaintiff in this case only has to prove the material allegations in her declaration by a greater weight or preponderance of all the evidence and not beyond a reasonable doubt; so if you find and believe from the evidence in this case that it preponderates in favor of the plaintiff, regardless of the number of witnesses testifying on either side, and however slight that preponderance may be, that is all the law requires, and is sufficient upon which to base a verdict for the plaintiff. ’ ’

Instructions of this character have not been held to be reversible error, but the use of words such as “and however slight that preponderance may be,” has been condemned by the courts in many cases. Riddle v. Mansager, 254 Ill. App. 68; Reivitz v. Chicago Rapid Transit Co., 327 Ill. 207; Molloy v. Chicago Rapid Transit Co., 335 Ill. 164.

Appellee’s seventh given instruction sets forth the provision of the Motor Vehicle Act relative to speed of automobiles on the highway and in going around a corner or a curve. Cahill’s St. ch. 95a, 23. After quoting the statute the instruction then told the jury that at the time of the alleged accident the said statute was in force in the State of Illinois, with reference to motor vehicles at the time of the accident in question. The part of the statute that reads, “If the rate of speed exceeds 35 miles an hour such rate of speed shall be prima facie evidence that the person operating such motor vehicle is running at a rate of speed greater than is reasonable and proper” tends to mislead the jury into concluding that, if it believes that the speed of the automobile exceeds 35 miles an hour, it must find, regardless of the surrounding circumstances, that the appellee has proved the operation of the vehicle at a rate of speed greater than is reasonable and proper. Stansfield v. Wood, 231 Ill. App. 586; Stamas v. Waskow, 250 Ill. App. 364; Riddle v. Mansager, 254 Ill. App. 68.

In Stansfield v. Wood, it is further said, “The rule as to what constitutes prima facie evidence as found in this statute is a rule of law for the guidance of the court and not a rule in the law of evidence to be given to the jury. (Chamberlyne on Evidence, 994.)”

A similar instruction was also held reversible error in Harris v. Piggly Wiggly Stores, Inc., 236 Ill. App. 392.

In Stamas v. Waskow, supra, the court said, “Where a case does not turn on the question of speed, or where the facts, regardless of any instruction, show an absolute liability, we would not reverse solely on the ground that this erroneous instruction was given. ’ ’

In this case we can see how the question of speed might have been one of compelling force with the jury and with the record in the condition it is, containing wilful and wanton counts in the declaration, we believe it was necessary to have the jury accurately instructed and that the errors are sufficient for a reversal of the case.

The judgment of the circuit court of Hamilton ' county is therefore reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice O'Connor

text:
    First District.
    Automobile Bonding Company, appellant, v. Edd C. Shain, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,723.
    Hatchett, J., dissents.
    Opinion filed March 28, 1932.
    Short, Rothbart, Willner & Lewis, for appellant; Seymour M. Lewis, of counsel. Ralph A. Berkowitz, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice O'Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice McSurely

text:
    Joseph Bezark, appellant, v. Mollie Bezark, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,432.
    Opinion filed March 28, 1932.
    Albert G. Rosenbaum, for appellant. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Pauline Mikus, defendant in error, v. Charles Baronowski, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 35,673.
    Opinion filed March 28, 1932.
    John S. O’Donnell, for plaintiff in error; William T. Pridmore and Helen A. 0’Mara, of counsel. Alfred O’Connor, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Matehett

text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. James Fawcett, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 35,690.

      Opinion filed March 28, 1932.
    John H. Johntry and Robert Mendelson, for plaintiff in error. John A. Swanson, State’s Attorney, for defendant in error; Otho S. Fasig and Edward E. Wilson, Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Matehett

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Matchett

text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Sam Hunt, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 35,691.
    Opinion filed March 28, 1932.
    John H. Johntry and Robert Mendelson, for plaintiff in error. John A. Swanson, State’s Attorney, for defendant in error; Otho S. Fasig and Edward E. Wilson, Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

text:
    Union Bank of Chicago, guardian of the estate of Benjamin Miller, a minor, appellee, v. City of Chicago, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,456.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    William H. Sexton, Corporation Counsel, and Alexander M. Srnietanka, City Attorney, for appellant; Charles M. McDonnell and Kathryn M. Barasa, Assistant City Attorneys, and Roy S. Gaskill, Assistant Corporation Counsel, of counsel. Eugene Cohen, for appellee; Murphy 0. Tate, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Sadie Botkowsky, appellee, v. Flamingo Hotel Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,474.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Brown, Fox & Blumberg, for appellant; Jacob Logan Fox, of counsel. Weissenbach, Hartman, Craig & Okin, for appellee; Harry Okin, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Alfred E. Staps, appellee, v. States Improvement Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,507.

      Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Ludwig Loewenstein, for appellant. Braun, Anderson & Norby, for apiiellee; Joseph H. Braun, Joseph B. Brodie and Arvid B. Anderson, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Gertrude E. Peterson, appellant, v. S. W. Straus & Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,544.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Rehearing denied April 18, 1932.
    Charles C. Spencer, for appellant. Denecn, Healy & Lee, for appellee; Harry W. Lippincott, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Union Bank of Chicago, appellee, v. Bernard C. Malter et al., defendants, on appeal of Bernard C. Malter, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,830.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Rubenstein & Becker, for appellant; Harry Becker, of counsel. Merle E. Pinch, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Kernel

text:
    Marcella Kobs, appellant, v. Kraemer Building Corporation et al., appellees.
    Gen. No. 35,281.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Gallagher & McDovitt and Shulman, Shulman & Abrams, for appellant; Meyer Abrams and Vincent G. Gallagher, of counsel. Pisher, Boydon, Bell, Boyd & Marshall, for appellee Central Trust Co. of Illinois. Bachraeh & Abt, for appellees Chicago Title & Trust Co. and Great American Securities Co. Poppenhusen, Johnston, Thompson & Cole, for appellee Greenebaum Sons Investment Co.
   Mr. Justice Kernel

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Kerner

text:
    Delia McCauley, appellant, v. Milton E. Helin and. Charles J. Agnew, appellees.
    Gen. No. 35,465.

      Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Rehearing denied and opinion modified April 18, 1932.
    Joseph F. Edward, Augustine J. Bowe and William J. Bowe, for appellant. John A. Bloomingston, for appellees. McKenna & Harris, for appellee Charles J. Agnew; James J. McKenna and Abraham W. Brussell, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Willimina McCleod Hogg, appellee, v. Dr. Clinton D. Collins, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,510.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Edward W. Rawlins and Eugene P. Kealy, for appellant. Milton H. Weiss and Dosland, Conner & Mayfield, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Central Trust Company of Illinois, appellee, v. Kraemer Building Corporation et al., defendants, on appeal of Marcella Kobs, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,570.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Gallagher & McDevitt and Shulman, Shulman & Abrams, for appellant; Meyer Abrams and Vincent G. Gallagher, of counsel. Sonnenschein, Berkson, Lautmann, Levinson & Morse, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, appellee, v. Arthur B. Knight et al., defendants. Arthur B. Knight, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,852.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Rehearing denied April 18, 1932.
    Joseph B. Lawler and C. Ray Smith, for appellant. Henry M. Ashton, for appellee; Edward M. Winston, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, appellee, v. Arthur B. Knight et al., defendants. Arthur B. Knight, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,853.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Rehearing denied April 18, 1932.

      Joseph B. Lawler and C. Ray Smith, for appellant. Henry M. Ashton, for appellee; Edward. M. Winston, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Scanlan

text:
    M. C. Mead, appellant, v. Sarah Coyne, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,388.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Ekern & Meyers and Luther E. Binkley, for appeRant. Kessler, Tobin & Miller, for appellee; Harry Tobin and Jacob Scher, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Edward H. Morris, receiver for Binga State Bank, appellee, v. Harry A. Friedman, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,412.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Harry A. Goldsmith, for api>ellant. James B. Cashin, for appellee; Thomas P. Harris, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company, appellee, v. David Paul Horger et al., defendants, on appeal of Dr. John W. O’Shea, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,428.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    William H. Kailes, for appellant. William McKinley and Paul E. Price, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Lee Tire & Rubber Company of New York, appellant, v. Anthony J. Toren et al., appellees.
    Gen. No. 35,504.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Rehearing denied April 18, 1932.
    Teller, Levit, Silvertrust & Levi, for appellant. Julius L. Kabaker, for appellees; Arnold S. Kabaker, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Barbara Price, appellee, v. O. J. Johnson and Arthur V. Johnson, appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,537.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Miller, Gorham & Wales, for appellants; Edward R. Adams and Herbert O. De Young, of counsel. Irving G. Zazove, for appellee; Ployd M. Ilenlay, of. counsel.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Louis Pine, appellee, v. William S. Kleinman, appellant. William S. Kleinman, appellant, v. Louis Pine, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,553.
    Opinion filed April 5, 1932.
    Harry Olson, for appellant. Morris K. Levinson, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

text:
    Kreszens Mandl, plaintiff in error, v. Manfred Lindner, defendant in error.
    Gen. No. 35,689.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Leopold Saltiel, for plaintiff in error. Pines, Morse & Stein, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice O ’Connor

text:
    Peter Petersen, appellee, v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company and The Pennsylvania Railroad Company, appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,758.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    M. L. Bluhm and Mason Bull, for appellants; C. S. Jefferson, of counsel. Royal W. Irwin, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice O ’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Philip Lome, appellee, v. Rubin E. Rappeport, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,779.

      Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Jacobson, Merrick, Merman & Silbert, for appellant; Milton K. Joseph, of counsel. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Western Screw Manufacturing Company, appellant, v. The Automatic Retailing Corporation, formerly Arcor-Illinois Corporation, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,800.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Rosenberg, Braude & Zimmerman, for appellant; Irving S. Berman and Isadore Fishman, of counsel. C. W. Larsen, for appellee; F. J. ICarasek, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Lorraine Hawkins, a minor, by James Hawkins, her father and next friend, defendant in error, v. Edgar McClun, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 35,384.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 9, 1932.
    John A. Bloomingston, for plaintiff in error. Joseph D. Ryan and Louis P. Miller, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Kenneth H. Idle, appellee, v. Continental Coffee Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,527.
    O’Connor, P. J., dissents.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 9, 1932.
    John A. Bloomingston, for appellant. Royal W. Irwin, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Louis Glickman, defendant in eror, v. Eser Schultz and Fannie Schultz, plaintiffs in error.
    Gen. No. 35,706.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Shulman, Shulman & Abrams, for plaintiffs in error; Meyer Abrams, of counsel. Gustav E. Beerly and Sidney Oppenheim, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Security Bank of Chicago, appellee, v. Electric Clock Corporation of America, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,755.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Joseph It. Golden and Maurice P. Golden, for appellant; Preston Clark, of counsel. Townley, Wild, Campbell & Clark, for appellee; Charles V. Clark, Glenn G. Paxton and Richard C. Bleloek, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    In re Estate of Margaret B. Brooks, deceased, John M. Banker and Lena Nasal, appellants, v. Edwin Hamilton, executor of the estate of Margaret B. Brooks, deceased, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,773.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    John H. Hill, for appellants. Justus Chancellor, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Lucille Rovas, appellee, v. The John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,785.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 9, 1932.
    Hoyne, O’Connor & Rubinkam, for appellant. Emil Lang, for appellee; Emil Lang and Benjamin M. Washer, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    L. Bush Rossiter, defendant in error, v. F. E. Brightman, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 35,670.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Edward D. Feinberg, for plaintiff in error. David & Fainman, for defendant in error; Sigmund W. David and William J. Lederer, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Egbert Hisert, administrator of the estate of Glen Hisert, deceased, appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company et al., appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,729.

      Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    George W. Miller and Arthur J. Donovan, for appellant; Frank L. Kriete and Thomas J. Synimes, of counsel. John J. Flanagan, for appellee; Daniel V. Gallery, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Matehett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Max Levin, appellee, v. Meyer J. Rubin, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,742.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Schofield & Wood, for appellant; Frank Schofield and David H. Kraft, of counsel. Luster & Luster and Henry Klein, for appellee; Max Luster, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The M. Simons & Son Company, Inc., appellee, v. Jenkins & Adair, Inc., appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,752.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Newby, McDonald & Burditt, for appellant; Geo. M. Burditt and Claire T. Driscoll, of counsel. Peden, Murphy & Ryan, for appellee; John C. Melaniphy, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Matehett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Alex Getz & Company, appellee, v. Walter A. Wade, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,791.
    Opinion filed April 25, 1932.
    Winston, Strawn & Shaw, "for appellant; John C. Slade, Paul H. Moore and Chas. J. Calderini, of counsel. Loucks, Eckert & Peterson, for appellees.
   Mr. Justice Matehett

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice Hebel

text:
    Martha Kovash, appellee, v. Alex Kovash, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,145.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    T. Fred Laramie, for appellant. J. H. Silver, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Hebel

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Charles Harris and Katherine Harris, appellants, v. Peter Vlahos et al., appellees.
    Gen. No. 35,157.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Myron E. Wiseh, for appellants; Sidney R. Tarkoff, of counsel. Richard Hill, Jr., and Charles H. Soelke, for appellees.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Hebel

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Antonia Budovich, appellee, v. Standard Oil Company, Indiana, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,240.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Barrett, Barrett & Wermuth, for appellant; Burrell J. Cramer, of counsel. George Pfirshing, for appellee; Chester D. Kern, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Hebel

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Genero Roberta, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 35,314.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 20, 1932.
    Michael Co stabile, for plaintiff in error; Martin M. Ward, of counsel. John A. Swanson, State’s Attorney, for defendant in error; Otho S. Fasig, Henry T. Chace, Jr., and Edward E. Wilson, Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Hebel

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Erick Blaine Thelin, appellant, v. William G. Barclay, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,364.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Kellam Poster, for appellant; Marshall Solberg, of counsel. Daniel A. Roberts, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Hebel

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Chicago Title and Trust Company, appellee, v. Leonard C. Levy et al. Rosie Schwartz and Louis Schwartz, appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,855.

      Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 20, 1932.
    Edward J. Kelley, for appellants. Edelson & Paullin, Walter V. Faclder and A. Edmund Peterson, for appellee; Hyland J. Paullin, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Hebel

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Friend

text:
    Agnes Tolkmitt, appellee, v. Albert Laba and Maggie Laba, appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,213.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Jacob Levy, for appellants; J. M. Gwin, of counsel. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Friend

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Chicago National Life Insurance Company, appellant, v. John M. Gibbons, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,259.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Lee D. Mathias and Clyde L. Todd, for appellant. P. P. Flick and Cooney & Vcrhoevcn, for appellee; John A. Verhocven, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Friend

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Milton Benzoin, appellee, v. New Jersey Fidelity and Plate Glass Insurance Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,265.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 20, 1932.
    Philip H. Treacy, for appellant. Leo L. Weil and Joseph Kotz, for appellee; Charles Blumenfeld, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Friend

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    In re Estate of James McCormick, deceased. Alta N. Gingrich, appellee, v. Joseph McCormick, administrator of the estate of James McCormick, deceased, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,441.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Thomas A. Walpole and George L. Reker, for appellant. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Friend

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    In re Estate of James McCormick, deceased. Alta N. Gingrich, appellee, v. Joseph McCormick, administrator of the estate of James McCormick, deceased, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,440.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Thomas A. Walpole and George L. Reker, for appellant. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Friend

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Wilbur S. Trader, appellee, v. Winifred T. Trader, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,451.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Andrew W. Sexton, for appellant; Fred J. McManus, of counsel. Harry X. Cole, for appellee; Cohon & Goldstein, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Friend

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Mildred Ressler, appellant, v. Foreman-State National Bank, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,517.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 20, 1932.
    Harrington & McDonnell, for appellant; Joseph T. Harrington, of counsel. D 'Ancona, Pflaum & Kohlsaat, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Friend

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    James Konz, appellee, v. Towle Nash Motor Sales, Inc., appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,563.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Arthur A. Basse, for appellant. Armin G. Kusswurm, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Friend

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Wilson

text:
    Alma Parmenter, appellee, v. City of Chicago, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,313.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.

      Francis X. Busch, Corporation Counsel, and Alexander M. Smietanka, City Attorney, for appellant; Matilda Feinberg and Kathryn M. Barasa, Assistant City Attorneys, and Roy S. Gaskill, Assistant Corporation Counsel, of counsel. Kamfner & Halligan, for appellee; Arthur J. Goldberg, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Wilson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Home Bank and Trust Company, appellee, v. Tekla Dziadulewicz et al., Stanley Adamski, impleaded, appellant. Stanley Adamski, appellant, v. Home Bank and Trust Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,445.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 20, 1932.
    Ewart Harris, for appellant. Cheney & Peterson, for appellee; Eugene E. Dornbaugh, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Wilson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Anna Olitzky, appellee, v. Molly Bloom and Paul Bloom, appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,454.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 20, 1932.
    Henry H. Koven, for appellants. Paul H. Hirsehfield and Charles T. Kramer, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Wilson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Lawrence M. Eilert, appellee, v. Andrew A. Rosencrans and Roy Rosencrans, appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,502.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    George E. Fidler, for- appellants. Thomas B. Lantry, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Wilson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Willard Monsen, trading as Monsen & Monsen, appellant, v. John George Wendell, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,511.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Arthur Chittiek, for appellant. Ho appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Wilson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Sam Kosova, appellant, v. Molly Bloom and Paul Bloom, appellees.
    Gen. No. 35,565.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 20, 1932.
    Paul Hirschfield, for appellant; Charles T. Kramer, of counsel. Henry H. Koven, for appellees.
   Mr. Justice Wilson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John Schweda, appellee, v. Jacob Slatkin et al., defendants, on appeal of Division State Bank et al., appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,914.
    Opinion filed May 4, 1932.
    William Rif kind, for appellants. William Sehiepan, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Wilson

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice MeSurely

text:
    Charles Hulsman, appellee, v. H. G. Fischer & Company, Inc. and A. H. Johnson, appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,732.
    Opinion filed May 16, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 31, 1932.
    Joseph 0. MeKieman, for appellant H. G. Fischer & Co.; John A. Russell, of counsel. Murphy O. Tate, for appellant A. H. Johnson; Leo M. Tarpey, of counsel. Philip Rosenthal, for appellee; Stuart B. ICrohn, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice MeSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Charles H. Essig, plaintiff in error, v. W. D. Boyce Company, defendant in error.
    Gen. No. 35,679.
    Opinion filed May 16, 1932.
    Rehearing stricken May 31. 1932.
    John E. Groves, for plaintiff in error. West & Eekhart, for defendant in error; John Neal Campbell, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Little Jones Coal Company, appellant, v. Edward M. Holton, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,770.

      Opinion filed May 16, 1932.
    William S. Collen, for appellant; Samuel S. Malleus, of counsel. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Matehett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Joseph C. Wiedmeyer, appellee, v. William Brantman, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,782.
    Opinion filed May 16, 1932.
    Harry A. Kerins and Aaron Gerch, for appellant; Albert R Gordon, of counsel. Schurmeier & Christianson, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Bessie Weissman and B. Pareski, appellees, v. W. P. Cooney, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,498.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 31, 1932.
    Henry N. Shah sin, for appellant. No appearance for appellees.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Martha Monheit, executrix of the last will of Dora Herbst, deceased, appellee, v. Harry M. Goldstine, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,522.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    John A. Bloomingston, for appellant. Murphy 0. Tate, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Susanna Murphy, administratrix of the estate of James F. Murphy, deceased, appellant, v. Walter Nehrebecki, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,568.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Walter S. Holden and Harry L. Fearing, for appellant. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Antoni Faticati, administrator of the estate of James Faticati, deceased, appellee, v. Christian Paschen et al., trading as Paschen Brothers, appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,584.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    McKenna & Harris, for appellants; James J. McKenna and Abraham W. Brussell, of counsel. Crahen, Sullivan, O’Toole & Sullivan, for appellee; John E. Crahen, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    General Contract Purchase Corporation, defendant in error, v. Joseph Harold Leven, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 35,596.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 31, 1932.
    Yale & Yale, for plaintiff in error. Allan S. Jackson, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Dr. A. M. Hewett, defendant in error, v. Anna E. Hill, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 35,609.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    William T. Pridmore, for plaintiff in error; Louie Marks, of counsel. Parker, McKeon & Olusman, for defendant in error; Lewis W. Hague, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Charles E. Fowler et al., appellees, v. Hi-Lo Fan Corporation et al., defendants, on appeal of Victor H. Leinweber et al., appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,635.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 31, 1932.
    Henry G. Hardy, for appellants. Louis P. Miller, for appellees. Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    William Ziogas, appellee, v. Paul Gegznas, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,655.

      Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Theodore A. Spence, for appellant. Leslie A. Kohn, for appellee; Mortimer A. Rothstein, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Kernel'

text:
    J. R. Von Kesler & Company, appellant, v. Chicago Cold Storage Company and Washington Berry Growers' Packing Corporation, appellees.
    Gen. No. 35,275.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Bangs, Crane & Slater, for appellant; Martin Crane, of counsel. Wilson & Mellvaine, for appellees; Clay Judson and K. P. Montgomery, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Kernel'

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Otto G. Raemisch, defendant in error, v. James Askounis et al., defendants. T. George Ganios, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 35,350.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    W. G. Anderson, for plaintiff in error. No appearance for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Kernel'

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    R. L. Geaslen et al., appellants, v. Oliver Salinger & Company et al., appellees.
    Gen. No. 35,425.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 31, 1932.
    John E. Owens, for appellants; Clyde O. Fisher and Thomas Ij. Owens, of counsel. Benson, Fitch & Heinemann, for appellees.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Leo Broyde, appellant, v. J. F. Hosty and Jacob J. Blumenfeld, appellees.
    Gen. No. 35,468.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 31, 1932.
    Nathan Packler, for appellant. Charles Blumenfeld, for appellees; Lewis Bennett, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Ed. Poncher, trading as Ed. Poncher & Company, appellant, v. Sterling Bolt Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,477.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Harold L. Eeigonholtz, for appellant; Sidney Rubin, of counsel. Kessler, Tobin & Miller, for appellee; Leon M. Miller, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    William Siegel, appellant, v. Solomon Benamy, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,492.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Irving L. Block, for appellant. Irving Zimmerman, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Abbot Ventilating Company, appellee, v. Edward W. Kaiser and Albert G. Kaiser, trading as E. B. Kaiser, appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,501.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Dennis J. O’Toole, for appellants. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Kernel-

text:
    Elizabeth Ryan, appellee, v. Singer Sewing Machine Company, Inc., appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,525.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Rehearing denied and additional opinion filed June 2, 1932.
    John A. Bloomingston, for appellant. Philip Rosenthal, for appellee; Stuart B. Krohn, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Kernel-

delivered the-opinion of the court.


text:
    Hynek M. Howell, appellee, v. Max Dietz, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,562.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 31, 1932.
    George J. Avery, for appellant. Shaeffer & Shaeffer, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    J. F. Brennan et al., trading as Stein, Alstrin & Company, appellees, v. J. R. Persselli, defendant. The National Bank of Chicago, garnishee. M. N. Elsenau and Harris Trust and Savings Bank, intervenors. M. N. Elsenau Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,578.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Lord, Lloyd & Bissell, for Harris Trust and Savings Bank; John S. Lord and A. C. Wetterstorm, of counsel. C. L. Blankenship, for appellant M. N. Elsenau. Moses, Kennedy, Stein & Bachraeh, for appellees; Walter Bachraeh, Seymour A. Greenblatt and Philip M. fíiiek, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    General Acceptance Company, appellee, v. J. B. Gillum, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,599.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 31, 1932.
    Edward Byrnhard Zahn, for appellant. Harry J. Rosenzweig and Clyde C. Eisher, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Fred W. Rentz and Augusta Rentz, defendants in error, v. William E. Meyers and George J. Jank, trading as W. E. Meyers & Company, plaintiffs in error.
    Gen. No. 35,622.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Morris K. Levinson, for plaintiffs in error. Walter Hamilton and John E. Erickson, for defendants in error.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Christian Gross, appellee, v. Virginia R. H. Gross, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,658.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Thomas Hart Fisher, for appellant. Robert E. Cantwell, Jr., for appellee; Martin W. Grosse, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Kerner

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Charles C. Hyde et al., trading as Hyde, Hennings, Westbrook & Watson, appellants, v. Templeton, Kenly & Company, Ltd., appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,471.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Lawler, Berry & McKerehar and Charles H. Watson, for appellants. Stevens, Carrier & Griffith, for appellee; Lee W. Carrier and Melvirí L. Griffith, of counsel. i
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John Williamson, appellant, v. Marjorie Eaton, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,495.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Richard E. Keogh, for appellant; Charles L. Mahony, of counsel. George C. Bliss, for appellee; Loueks, Eckert & Peterson, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Alvin Wozbut, appellant, v. Joe Juris, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,528.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    William R. Peacock, for appellant. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. John Gohman and Louis Franklin, plaintiffs in error.
    Gen. No. 35,541.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Forest H. Richards, for plaintiffs in error. John A. Swanson, State ’p Attorney, for defendant in error; Albert C. DeWitt and Edward E. Wilson, Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Ruth R. Lighthall, appellee, v. I. D. Opat, appellant.
    Gen. No. 35,581.

      Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    William G. Lesemann, for appellant. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Olaf Nelson, appellant, v. Edward Hlavka, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,630.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Mortimer A. Rothstein, for appellant. S. D. Tannenbaum, for ai>pellee.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Elkan Berger, defendant in error, v. Linus Ewald Roder, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 35,640.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 31, 1932.
    James K. Finn and Cooney & Verhoeven, for plaintiff in error; James K. Finn, of counsel. Welch & Hoffman, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Frederick A. Wilson, appellant, v. Henry B. Kilgour, appellee.
    Gen. No. 35,661.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Harry H. Felgar, for appellant; Simon P. Gary, of counsel. Cheney, Evans & Peterson, for appellee; Albert Peterson, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Armando E. Benedetti, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 35,702.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    James H. Cronin, for plaintiff in error. John A. Swanson, State’s Attorney, for defendant in error; Otlio S. Fasig and Edward E. Wilson, Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Chicago Title and Trust Company, appellee, v. Harry Ram et al., defendants. Max Agranowsky and Sophie Agranowsky, appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,858.
    Opinion filed May 17, 1932.
    Meyer W. Rosin, for appellants; William Shapiro, of counsel. Edwin D. Lawlor, Walter Y. Fackler and A. Edmund Peterson, for appellee; Saul Bernstein, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Douglas Park Day and Night Nursery, appellee, v. George Dickey et al., defendants. Madison & Kedzie State Bank and Chicago Title & Trust Company, first successor in trust, appellants.
    Gen. No. 36,005.
    Opinion filed May 26, 1932.
    Winston, Strawn & Shaw and Walter V. Fackler, for appellants; Harold Beaeom, Richard H. Hollen, Arthur D. Welton, Jr., and Anthony L. Michel, of counsel. Aaron Soble and William Feldman, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Mary Rubinsky, appellee, v. Gertrude Hodgson et al., defendants. Madison & Kedzie State Bank, trustee, and Chicago Title & Trust Company, first successor in trust, appellants.
    Gen. No. 36,008.
    Opinion filed May 26, 1932.
    Winston, Strawn & Shaw and Walter Y. Fackler, for appellants; Harold Beaeom, Richard H. Hollen, Arthur D. Welton, Jr., and Anthony L. Michel, of counsel. Aaron Soble and William Feldman, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Sam Schwartz, appellee, v. Howard G. Reed et al. Madison & Kedzie State Bank and Chicago Title and Trust Company, first successor in trust, appellants.
    Gen. No. 35,998.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Winston, Strawn & Shaw and Walter Y. Fackler, for appellants; Harold Beaeom, Richard H. Hollen, Arthur D. Welton, Jr., and Anthony L. Michel, of counsel. Aaron Soble and William Feldman, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Mary Rubinsky, appellee, v. Gust Zettas et al. Madison & Kedzie State Bank and Chicago Title and Trust Company, first successor in trust, appellants.
    Gen. No. 36,031.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Winston, Strawn & Shaw and Walter V. Eaekler, for appellants; Harold Beaeom, Richard H. Hollen, Arthur D. Welton, Jr., and Anthony L. Michel, of counsel. Aaron Soble and William Feldman, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice O ’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Baldwin

text:
    Second District.
    The People of the State of Illinois ex rel. George H. Worth, appellant, v. City of Waukegan, appellee.
    Gen. No. 8,379.
    Opinion filed February 18, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1932.
    George W. Field, for appellant. Arthur Bulkley, Corporation Counsel, for appellee; Okel S. Fuqua, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Marie A. Baker, defendant in error, v. Edward Baker, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 8,390.
    Opinion filed February 18, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1932.
    William Zwanzig, for plaintiff in error. Boys, Osborn & Hayes, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    J. D. Frye and Ella Frye, appellants, v. C. C. Bargreen, appellee.
    Gen. No. 8,415.
    Opinion filed February 18, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1932.
    Robert E. Larkin, for appellants. Arthur H. Shay, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Harry B. Brown, administrator of the estate of Catherine Brown, deceased, appellee, v. The Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,439.

      Opinion filed February 18, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1932.
    Bibbs & Pool, for appellant; Daniel Taylor, of counsel. Butters & Butters, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Mary Pocivavsek, appellee, v. John Brabender and Joseph Woodshank, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,450.
    Opinion filed February 18, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1932.
    Charles W. Helmig and Rieholson & O’Meara, for appellant. Butters & Butters, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    S. B. Geiger, appellee, v. City of Rockford, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,459.
    Opinion filed February 18, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1932.
    Wilbur B. Johnson and David D. Madden, for appellant. Early & Early, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    George D. Wagner, appellee, v. Toledo, Peoria and Western Railroad, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,469.
    Opinion filed February 18, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1932.
    Miller, Elliott & Westcrvelt, for apprellant; John M. Elliott, of counsel. E. V. Champion, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Wolfe

text:
    Owen Anderson, administrator of the estate of Anton Kasprzak, deceased, appellee, v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,364.
    Opinion filed February 18, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1932.
    Hibbs & Pool, for appellant; Daniel Taylor, of counsel. Butters & Butters and M. D. Morahn, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Wolfe

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Leonard Piazza, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 8,387.
    Opinion filed February 18, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1932.
    Frank A. McCarthy and Theodore N. Schnell, for plaintiff in error. William D. ICnight, State’s Attorney, and Alfred B. Louison, Assistant State’s Attorney, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Wolfe

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    National Contract Purchase Corporation, appellee, v. Glen Building Corporation, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,406.
    Opinion filed March 15, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1932.
    Hadley & Weaver, for appellant; Willard E. Cain and John S. Woodward, of counsel. McDonald & Richmond, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Wolfe

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Lee Stapleton, appellee, v. Erma Dewey, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,468.
    Opinion filed March 15, 1932.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1932.
    Miller, Elliott & Westervelt, for appellant; O. P. Westervelt and Eugene R. Johnson, of counsel. John E. Cassidy, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Wolfe

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice Jett

text:
    Mary Walsh, defendant in error, v. William Connors, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 8,348.
    Opinion filed March 30, 1932.
    Butters & Butters, for plaintiff in error. Robert E. Larkin, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Jett

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr, Presiding Justice Jett

text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, petitioner, v. Harry J. Cooper, respondent.
    Gen. Nos. 8,385 and 8,386.
    Opinion filed March 30, 1932.
    Maurice F. Lord, for petitioner. D. J. Peffers, for respondent.
   Mr, Presiding Justice Jett

delivered the opinion of the court,


text:
    Herman A. Marten, conservator of the estate of Christ Guehler, appellee, v. Bert W. Meads et al., appellants. W. C. Gilmore et al., appellants, v. William Guehler et al., appellees.
    Gen. No. 8,458.
    Opinion filed April 7, 1932.
    C. B. Chapman, for appellants. Butters & Butters and Lester Horan, for appellees.
   Mr. Justice Wolfe

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Elizabeth McAuliff, appellee, v. John F. Hawley, executor of the last will and testament of William C. Hawley, deceased, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,338.
    Opinion filed May 13, 1932.
    Rehearing denied July 23, 1932. .
    William E. Mooney, for appellant. Vincent S. Lumley and Fred B. Bennett, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Jett

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice

text:
    Frank Gray, administrator of the estate of Helen Gray Pierson, deceased, defendant in error, v. Gerald Johnson, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 8,371.
    Opinion filed May 13, 1932.
    Rehearing denied July 23, 1932.
    Marsh, Lewis & Thompson and Murphy & Kritzer, for plaintiff in error. Graham & Melburg, for defendant in error; Bardens & Mel-burg, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice

Jett delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Rettig-Stamm-Gruen, Inc., appellant, v. Roy Yeoman, trading as Henderson Jewelry Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 8,397.
    Opinion filed May 13, 1932.
    E. P. Parnass and Edwards- & Block, for appellant; Claire C. Edwards and Sidney H. Block, of counsel. Litchfield & Snyder, for appellee; Gerald C. Snyder, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The LaSalle National Bank, appellee, v. Matt Knauf and O. C. Yoder, defendants. O. C. Yoder, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,418.
    Opinion filed May 13, 1932.
    John J. Massieon and Butters & Butters, for appellant. J. E. Malone and Duncan & O’Conor, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The Joliet National Bank, appellee, v. William O. Bates, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,442.
    Opinion filed May 13, 1932.
    Carnahan & Slusser, John H. Savage and James G. Holbrook, for appellant. Dagger & Blatt, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    In re Estate of Thomas F. Painter, deceased. Armor Moreland, executor, appellant, v. Lodema Alice Painter, appellee.
    Gen. No. 8,470.
    Opinion filed May 13, 1932.
    Addison J. Boutelle and R. D. Robinson, for appellant. Woolsey, Stickney & Lewis, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Edward Oltmanns, administrator of the estate of Beulah Oltmanns, deceased, plaintiff in error, v. Edward Meiners, defendant in error.
    Gen. No. 8,473.
    Opinion filed May 13, 1932.
    H. A. Brooks, Edward A. Jones and H. J. Folkers, for plaintiff in error. Jacob Cantlin and J. J. Ludens, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Per curiam.

text:
    Henry Olson, appellant, v. Harry B. North, appellee.
    Gen. No. 8,245.
    Opinion filed May 13, 1932.
    Frank E. Maynard, for appellant. David D. Madden and Lathrop, Lathrop, Brown & Lathrop, for appellee; David D. Madden and Roy H. Brown, of counsel.
   Per curiam.


text:
    Henry Boomgarden, administrator of the estate of Augusta Boomgarden, deceased, appellee, v. Chicago and Eastern Illinois Railway Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,488.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1932.
    Free P. Morris and Roscoe O. South, for appellant; Kenneth L. Richmond, of counsel. Wendell P. ICay, for appellee; J. N. Moore, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Baldwin

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Hazel R. Batson, defendant in error, v. Herbert M. Batson, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 8,391.
    Opinion filed June 7, 1932.
    Frank T. Jordan, for plaintiff in error. Hadley & Weaver, for defendant in error; Willard E. Cain and John S. Woodward, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Jett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Lincoln B. Evans, appellant, v. Frank J. Reinke Motor Sales and Commercial Credit Trust, appellees.
    Gen. No. 8,455.
    Opinion filed June 7, 1932.
    William H. Tuttle, for appellant. James Eugene Malone and Robert Graham Smith, for appellees.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Jett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. George Powell, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 8,380.
    Opinion filed June 7, 1932.
    Mktheny & Welker, for plaintiff in error. A. Fred Kendall, State’s Attorney, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Wolfe

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Edward Erhart, appellee, v. Henry Genslinger, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,412.
    Opinion filed June 7, 1932.

      Arthur H. Shay, for appellant. John J. Massieon and Butters & Butters, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Wolfe

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Phoenix Finance Corporation, Ltd., appellant, v. Charles R. Kleber, trading as Kleber Coal Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 8,457.
    Opinion filed June 7, 1932.
    Rehearing denied July 23, 1932.
    Robert W. Waugh, for appellant. William L. Pierce, for axipellec.
   Mr. Justice Wolfe

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Barney Doll, appellee, v. Charles Haas and Andrew Haas, appellants.
    Gen. No. 8,486.
    Opinion filed June 7, 1932.
    Reuben R. Tiffany and Hunter & Hunter, for appellants. Elwyn R. Shaw, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Wolfe

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The First Iowa State Trust & Savings Bank of Burlington, Iowa, appellee, v. The Bank of Oquawka, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,498.
    Opinion filed June 7, 1932.
    Rehearing denied July 23, 1932.
    Nelson, Neagle & Gustafson and M. E. Nolan, for appellant. Murphy & Kritzer, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Wolfe

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice Niehaus

text:
    Third District.
    L. F. Nail, appellee, v. General Motors Acceptance Corporation, appellant.
    Gen. No. 8,581.
    Opinion filed April 27, 1932.
    Rehearing denied October 4, 1932.
    C. F. Wescoat and Chapman & Du Hadway, for appellant; O. F. Weseoat and F. A. Du Hadway, of counsel. C. C. Ellison and Sumner & Reardon, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Niehaus

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Grace I. Barnett, appellant, v. East Lincoln Farmers Grain Company, etc., appellee.
    Gen. No. 8,584.
    Opinion filed April 27, 1932.
    Harold F. Trapp, for appellant. Peter Murphy and E. C. Mills, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Niehaus

delivered the' opinion of the court.


text:
    Effie E. Dare, appellant, v. Francis S. Dare, appellee.
    Gen. No. 8,593.
    Opinion filed April 27, 1932.
    Noah Gullett, for appellant; B. L. Catron, of counsel. John P. Snigg, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Niehaus

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Eldredge

text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Homer Dunsworth, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 8,600.
    Opinion filed April 27, 1932.
    J. W. Templeman, for plaintiff in error. Wallace A. Walker, State’s Attorney, for defendant in error; R. B. O’Harra, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Farrell State Bank, appellee, v. Stella Hamilton and Floyd Hamilton, appellants.
    Gen. No. 8,613.
    Opinion filed April 27, 1932.
    A. M. Fitzgerald and H. C. Moore, for appellants-. James M. Barnes, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Shurtleff

text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Lester Rich, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 8,587.
    Opinion filed April 27, 1932.
    Richard H. Radley, for plaintiff in error. Louis P. Dunkelberg, State’s Attorney, for defendant in error; Harold J. Rust, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Shurtleff

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Mt. Pulaski Auto Company, appellant, v. Cordia Starr, appellee.
    Gen. No. 8,621.
    Opinion filed April 27, 1932.
    Rehearing denied October 4, 1932.
    George J. Smith and Harold F. Trapp, for appellant. Burton A. Tyler, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Shurtleff

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Fulton

text:
    Fourth District. .
    Henry W. Niemann, appellee, v. The Security Benefit Association, appellant.
    Opinion filed February 1, 1932.
    Terry, Gueltig & Powell, A. W. Fulton and Jos. F. Sheen, for appellant. Wesley Lueders, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Fulton

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice Barry

text:
    The First National Bank of Granite City, appellant, v. William Schooley and Eleanor Schooley, appellees.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    J. C. Steele and Wamoek, Williamson & Burroughs, for appellant. R. W. Griffith and Wesley Lueders, for appellees.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Barry

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Virla Hudson, appellee, v. Leland W. Hudson, appellant.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    A. D. Morgan, for appellant. Ferrell & Hay, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Barry

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Hazel Bost, defendant in error, v. David E. Bost, plaintiff in error.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Marsh, Lewis, Thompson & Barash, for plaintiff in error. Grimm & Mueller and R. H. Wieehert, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Barry

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    William Matievich, appellee, v. Illinois Terminal Company, appellant.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Terry, Gueltig & Powell and E. Bentley Hamilton, for appellant.. J. B. Harris, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Barry

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Raymond LaGrone, by Simon LaGrone, his father and next friend, appellee, v. Frank H. Stratmann, appellant.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Pope & Driemeyer, for appellant. McGlynn & MeGlynn, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Barry

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Mabel Byron, appellee, v. Anthony Todoroff, appellant.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Rehearing denied July 27, 1932.
    Arthur R. Felsen, for appellant. Beasley & Zulley, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Barry

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Edwards

text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Millard Bowers, plaintiff in error.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Alpheus Gustin, for plaintiff in error. Osear E. Carlstrom, Attorney General, J. J. Neiger and A. 1ST. Tolliver, Assistant Attorneys General, D. F. Rumsey, State’s Attorney, and S. D. Wise, Assistant State’s ■Attorney, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Edwards

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John Edmonds and Fannie Edmonds, appellants, v. W. D. Gourley, appellee.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Fred Smith, for appellants. H. A. Evans, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Edwards

delivered .the opinion of the court.


text:
    Krist Kristoff, appellant, v. Bill Kristopolus, appellee.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Rehearing denied August 4, 1932.
    Ferdinand Tunnell, for appellant. Henry B. Eaton, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Edwards

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Marie Kilgrove, appellee, v. Protective Mutual Benefit Association of Sparta, Illinois, appellant.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    George W. Dowell, for appellant. Wilbert F. Ebers and John W. Tweed, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Edwards

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Company, appellee, v. Town of Blairsville, appellant.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    J. Roy Browning, for appellant. Neely & Cook, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Edwards

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Earl D. Amsler, receiver of the Merchants State Bank, appellee, v. Robert E. Tate et al., appellants.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Wilson & Wilson, for appellants. R. J. Branson and June C. Smith, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Edwards

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Walter J. Schildroth, appellee, v. Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis, appellant.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Kramer, Campbell, Costello & Wieehert, for appellant; T. M. Pierce and J. L. Howell, of counsel. Ralph Cook and H. H. Patterson, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Fulton

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Ed. Mercer, plaintiff in error.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    D. H. Mudge, for plaintiff in error. C. C. Ellison, Special State’s Attorney, for defendant in error; Henry B. Eaton and Harry Faulkner, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Fulton

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    G. H. Jacobs, appellant, v. W. G. Frank et al., trading as Friend & Hassler, appellees.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Rehearing denied July 27, 1932.
    House & House and June C. Smith, for appellant. J. Paul Carter and Farmer & Klingel, for appellee W. G. Frank. Amos W. Tharp and Ralph F. Lesemann, for appellees Lee A. Friend and O. B. Hassler.
   Mr. Justice Fulton

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Lola May Effinger, appellee, v. Henry S. Effinger et al., appellants.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Joyce & Zerweck, for appellants. R. B. Hendricks, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Fulton

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    States Corporation, appellant, v. Southern Illinois and Kentucky Railroad Company, appellee.
    Opinion filed June 9, 1932.
    Rehearing denied July 27, 1932.
    George A. Hickman and McKinney, Lynde & Grear, for. appellant; Harold W. Hawes and Cornelius Lynde, of counsel. Charles E. Feirich, Moses Pulverman and Edward C. Craig, for appellee; R. V. Fletcher, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Fulton

delivered the opinion of the court.