Klimes v. Hanek
Frank Klimes v. John Hanek. [Fn1]
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Action to recover the value of three promissory notes alleged to have been converted by defendant and appropriated to his own use. Plaintiff had a verdict for the full amount claimed by him. The appeal is from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.
The issues were clearly ones of fact and for the jury. In a charge, the correctness of which is not questioned, the court properly submitted them. Plaintiff’s testimony and that of defendant were in many particulars in direct opposition. Plaintiff’s testimony had corroboration in all essential features. A recital of the facts is not necessary; neither the litigants nor the profession would benefit therefrom. No reversible errors occurred at the trial.
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.