From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Corso v. Knapp

Appellate Court of Illinois
Jul 1, 1952
347 Ill. App. 556 (Ill. App. Ct. 1952)

Summary

In Corso v. Knapp, 347 Ill. App. 556, it was held that where a party attempts an explanation of why a witness was absent the other party has a right to comment on what he considers the inadequacy of the explanation.

Summary of this case from Santiemmo v. Days Transfer, Inc.

Opinion

Gen. No. 45,603. (Abstract of Decision.)

Opinion filed July 1, 1952 Released for publication August 5, 1952

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. FRANK A. BICEK, Judge, presiding. Judgment affirmed. Heard in the second division, first district, this court at the October term, 1951.

Wyatt Jacobs, for appellants;

Charles E. Heckler, of counsel;

William H. Arpaia, for appellee;

William H. Arpaia, and Norman S. Rothbart, of counsel.


Not to be published in full. Opinion filed July 1, 1952; released for publication August 5, 1952.


Summaries of

Corso v. Knapp

Appellate Court of Illinois
Jul 1, 1952
347 Ill. App. 556 (Ill. App. Ct. 1952)

In Corso v. Knapp, 347 Ill. App. 556, it was held that where a party attempts an explanation of why a witness was absent the other party has a right to comment on what he considers the inadequacy of the explanation.

Summary of this case from Santiemmo v. Days Transfer, Inc.
Case details for

Corso v. Knapp

Case Details

Full title:John Corso, Appellee, v. Fred Knapp, Arthur Doyle and Rudolph Diognardi…

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois

Date published: Jul 1, 1952

Citations

347 Ill. App. 556 (Ill. App. Ct. 1952)
107 N.E.2d 59

Citing Cases

Santiemmo v. Days Transfer, Inc.

The right of counsel to make such comment is thoroughly discussed in Beery v. Breed, 311 Ill. App. 469, which…