(Download) "Fulford v. O'Connor" by Supreme Court of Illinois * eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Fulford v. O'Connor
- Author : Supreme Court of Illinois
- Release Date : January 23, 1954
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 64 KB
Description
Plaintiff, David E. Fulford, brought an action against John J. O'Connor and Anthony J. Brankin, to recover damages for false
imprisonment and malicious prosecution. The jury returned a general verdict awarding the plaintiff $4000 damages. Upon a special
interrogatory submitted to them, the jury also found specially that the conduct of the defendants was not "wilful and wanton,
such as to show malicious intent on their part." Defendants moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict upon several grounds,
of which the only appropriate one is that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. Defendants also moved for
a new trial. The trial court granted the former motion and on April 10, 1953, entered judgment for the defendants. No disposition
was made of the motion for new trial. On April 23 plaintiff moved to vacate the judgment for the defendants, on several grounds,
of which we need only concern ourselves with the following: "2. The entry of said judgment notwithstanding the verdict was
in violation of section 5 of article 2 of the Constitution of the State of Illinois and that plaintiff was thereby deprived
of his right to trial by jury." This motion was overruled, and the plaintiff appeals. He brings his appeal here on the theory
that the case involves a construction of the Illinois constitution. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1953, chap. 110, par. 199.) Defendants
challenge our jurisdiction of the appeal. The basis of the plaintiff's contention is that in a jury trial at common law there was no such thing as a motion for judgment
notwithstanding the verdict which raised the question of the existence of evidence to sustain the verdict. A motion by that
name existed, but it was available only to the plaintiff, and then only upon the basis of an insufficiency in the defendant's
pleadings.