W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Ulm

1 Citing case

  1. Nelson v. Union Wire Rope Corp.

    39 Ill. App. 2d 73 (Ill. App. Ct. 1963)   Cited 29 times
    In Nelson v. Union Wire Rope Corporation, 39 Ill. App.2d 73, 187 N.E.2d 425, one of the issues involved was whether certain cable was defective.

    That it affords no authority for the admissibility of the records in question is patent, but they were not offered or admitted under that statute. They are the records of a third person, and are admissible under the long-recognized common law rule relating to records kept in the regular course of business — an exception to the hearsay rule, recognized as such because this type of evidence arises from a circumstance offering every inducement to the accurate recording of information and none to its falsification. (People v. Small, 319 Ill. 437, 476, 150 N.E. 435; Kenna v. Calumet, Hammond Southeastern R. Co., 206 Ill. App. 17, 38, 39 (First District); Gauger v. Mills, 340 Ill. App. 1, 9, 90 N.E.2d 790 (Second District); W.T. Rawleigh Co. v. Ulm, 268 Ill. App. 248, 258 (Third District); In re Estate of Moorhouse, 249 Ill. App. 432, 445 (First District); Wigmore on Evidence, Third Edition, Sec 1530(3).) Plaintiffs rely on Wright v. Upson, 303 Ill. 120, 135 N.E. 209.