Opinion
Gen. No. 9,649. (Abstract of Decision.)
Opinion filed August 7, 1941
1. INSTRUCTIONS, § 63 — letter, presumption as to receipt, instruction. Where testimony showed that letter had been improperly addressed, court properly refused instruction that it should be presumed to have been received.
See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.
2. SAVING QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW, § 106fn_ — excessiveness of verdict, by motion for new trial. Failure to claim excessiveness of verdict in motion for new trial prevents consideration on appeal, and matter is not covered by allegation in motion that the verdict was not supported by the evidence.
3. BANKING, § 93fn_ — conversion of paper left for collection. Evidence that bank president induced woman to purchase notes secured by mortgage by promise that she could have her money back whenever she wanted it, that he paid her interest thereon for considerable time, that she left notes with bank for collection, and that bank foreclosed mortgage without her authority and without making her party to suit, supported finding that bank converted notes and was liable therefor, although bank contended that she received letter stating that foreclosure proceedings were being instituted, which she denied, and that she delivered notes to bank for purpose of foreclosure.
4. WITNESSES, § 88fn_ — disinterested witness to transaction with person since deceased. Testimony of disinterested witness to conversation between persons, one of whom died prior to trial, was admissible.
Appeal from Circuit Court of Will county; Hon. ROSCOE C. SOUTH, presiding.
Affirmed. Heard in this court at February term, 1941.
Snapp, Heise Snapp, for appellant;
Dorrance D. Snapp and William M. Garvey, of counsel;
Ray F. Faulkner and Matthew W. Stefanich, for appellee;
Ray F. Faulkner, of counsel.
"Not to be published in full." Opinion filed August 7, 1941.