delivered the opinion of the court.
Tabor Coal & Supply Co. v. Cohen, 189 Ill. App. 190 (1914)
Oct. 13, 1914
·
Illinois Appellate Court
·
Gen. No. 19,687
189 Ill. App. 190
Tabor Coal & Supply Company, Defendant in Error, v. Isaac Cohen, Plaintiff in Error.
Gen. No. 19,687.
(Not to be reported in full.)
Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Courtney, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1913.
Affirmed.
Opinion filed October 13, 1914.
Statement of the Case.
Action in the Municipal Court of Chicago by Tabor Coal & Supply Company, a corporation, against Isaac Cohen on an account stated for coal sold and delivered by plaintiff to defendant. The statement of claim described the demand as follows:
“For $200 being an account stated and rendered and balance agreed upon between plaintiff and defendant on or about the 28th day of December, 1912.”
The defendant in his amended “Affidavit of Merits” denied that there was any “account stated” or “balance agreed on” at any time, and denied that he was indebted to said plaintiff in any sum for any coal. To reverse a judgment entered on a finding for plaintiff, defendant prosecutes a writ of error.
*191Abstract of the Decision.
1. Account stated, § 25 * —when finding sustained by the evidence. In an action on an account stated for coal sold and delivered where the defendant denied there was any “account stated,” held that a finding in favor of plaintiff was sustained by the evidence.
2. Account stated, § 24—admissibility of evidence. In an action on a stated account for coal sold and delivered, held not error to exclude testimony concerning the quality of the coal where the quality was not an issue on the trial.
3. Evidence, § 107 * —what sufficient to establish identity of spealeer over telephone. Evidence held sufficient to establish the identity of a person speaking over a telephone so as to render the telephone conversation admissible where the speaker gave his name to witness and declared his intention of making a payment by check of a certain amount and the witness received the check for such amount the next morning.
Levy & O’Donnell, for plaintiff in error.
Smejkal, Klenha & Krasa, for defendant in error; Hwass & Luebeck, of counsel.