Israelstam v. United States Casualty Co., 201 Ill. App. 512 (1916)

Oct. 18, 1916 · Illinois Appellate Court · Gen. No. 20,862

201 Ill. App. 512

H. and A. Israelstam, trading as Grant Works Fair, Appellees, v. United States Casualty Company, Appellant.

Gen. No. 20,862.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Appeal and error, § 878 ^* —When question of insufficiency of evidence to sustain judgment may not he raised on appeal. The contention that the evidence was insufficient to support the amount of a judgment cannot be raised for the first time in the appellant’s reply brief.

2. Insurance, § 704*—when judgment will not he set aside on appeal as unsupported by evidence. In an action on a policy of burglary insurance, providing that there could be no recovery for loss if the accounts and records of the assured were not so kept that the actual loss could he accurately determined therefrom, held that the Appellate Court could not say that the finding of the trial court that the loss could he determined from the accounts and records was not supported by evidence which tended to show that the plaintiffs kept a ledger, cashbook, checkbook, invoices, sales slips and an inventory, the latter being made up some- months before the loss, and including testimony of one of the plaintiffs that from these the amount of the loss could be determined, where the inventory, invoices, sales slips and checkbook were not preserved in the record.

Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Edmund K. Jarecki, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1914.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed October 18, 1916.

Rehearing denied November 3, 1916.

Statement of the Case.

Action by H. and A. Israelstam, copartners, trading as Grant Works Fair, plaintiffs, against the United States Casualty Company, a corporation, defendant, on a policy of burglary insurance. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals.

Moses, Rosenthal & Kennedy, for appellant; Walter Bachrach, of counsel.

Rose, Symmes & Kirkland and John L. Fogle, for appellees.

* See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

* See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.

3. Insurance, § 287 ^* —what is purpose of condition in policy for keeping of accounts. On an appeal by an insurer from a judgment for a loss entered in favor of the insured under a policy of burglary insurance, providing that there could be no recovery for loss if the accounts and records of the insured were not so kept that the actual loss could be accurately determined therefrom, held that the judgment would not be reversed on the ground that the condition in respect to the keeping of accounts had not been fulfilled by the insured where it was not claimed that the judgment did not represent the amount of the loss, as such condition was merely intended to protect the insurer against an excessive claim.