Once Again, Reasoning For The Rule Of Law Comes In The Form Of Dissent

This opinion was just issued 3-days ago. The majority, as we see all too often, have opted to ignore the rule of law by accepting evidence without any proper foundation or testimony. Fortunately, there are still a few Justices willing to speak out against such rulings.

citmortgage v. sconyers   2014 IL App (1st) 130023

JUSTICE NEVILLE, dissenting.

¶ 18 I respectfully dissent because the majority’s decision conflicts with Illinois Supreme Court case law concerning the burden of proof when a written instrument shows on its face evidence of an alteration.

¶ 22 The circuit court based its finding not on any testimony, but solely on the way the document looked to the court. I have found no authority, and the majority, the parties, and the circuit court cite no authority, that permits a court to determine that a document is an original based solely on the appearance of the document, without any supporting testimony or other evidence. Moreover, I have found no authority, and the majority, the parties, and the circuit court cite no authority, for the proposition that the ability to present an original document to the trial court proves that the presenter counts as the legal holder of the document.