Haskell v. Siegmund
Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District
170 N.E.2d 393 (1960)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Peter Haskell, by his father and next friend Ralph Haskell (plaintiff), sued Albert Siegmund (codefendant) for damages arising from a car accident. Walter Peterson owned and insured the car Siegmund was driving at the time. The trial court entered judgment against Siegmund, which Haskell then sued Peterson's insurer (codefendant) to collect. Peterson died before that action could be tried. Under Peterson's insurance policy, the insurer was liable for payment only if Siegmund drove Peterson's car with Peterson's permission. The trial evidence included Peterson's written statements to the insurer's investigator, made shortly after the accident, admitting he permitted Siegmund to use his car. The trial court entered judgment against the insurer, and the insurer appealed to the Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District, on the grounds that Peterson's statements were inadmissible hearsay evidence.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Reynolds, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
