Ludwig v. Sager

• Decision Date: 30 September 1876
• Citation: 84 Ill. 99,1876 WL 10447
• Parties: JOHN LUDWIG et al.v.LAURA S. SAGER.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

84 Ill. 99

1876 WL 10447 (Ill.)

JOHN LUDWIG et al.

v.LAURA S. SAGER.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

September Term, 1876.

WRIT OF ERROR to the Circuit Court of Carroll county; the Hon. WILLIAM W. HEATON, Judge, presiding.

Messrs. BARGE & DIXON, for the plaintiffs in error.

Messrs. ARMOUR & SHAW, and Mr. J. Q. WING, for the defendant in error.

Mr. JUSTICE SCOTT delivered the opinion of the Court:

What injury plaintiff may have sustained to her means of support, by reason of defendants selling or giving intoxicating liquors to her husband, was for the jury to find, under the evidence submitted. While that is the general rule, courts always retain, to a greater or less extent, a supervision over verdicts, to the end no injustice may be done. Otherwise, verdicts, the result of passion or prejudice, or total misapprehension of the evidence, might work incalculable hardships. Jurors are usually taken from the body of the county, are men of no great experience in legal matters, and although with an honest purpose to do justice, they may often be misled by impassioned appeals to their prejudices and sympathies. More frequently still, a wrong impression is made upon their minds by improper instructions. Care should always be observed, in cases sounding exclusively in damages, that no instruction is given that would induce action not warranted by the law and the evidence, or that would produce a conclusion not in the interest of justice.

With the merits of this litigation we will not concern ourselves at this time. No importance can be attached to the verdict on account of the erroneous character of the instructions given. Some of the charges given on behalf of plaintiff contain bad law, and all of them are subject to the just censure, they are argumentative in style and highly calculated to mislead minds not accustomed to investigate legal subjects. It is not practicable for us to enter upon an examination of all the legal principles contained in the numerous propositions submitted. That would impose upon us a vast labor that could be of no possible utility. All the objections may be grouped together, and the whole series condemned, because they are arguments addressed to the consideration of the jury, rather than concise propositions of law applicable to the facts of the case as developed on the evidence. Many of the instructions, and perhaps all of them, contain correct principles of law, but they are so confused, by the manner of statement, with erroneous propositions, they could give the jury no just idea of the law applicable to the case they were considering. Some of them consist largely of the reasoning to be found in the opinions of courts, and, as arguments in the...