## Facts

- John F. Corcoran sued the City of Chicago for personal injuries, alleging the City negligently maintained streets in an unsafe condition.
- A jury in the Superior Court of Cook County returned a $5,000 verdict for Corcoran; the trial court entered judgment and denied the City’s motion for a new trial.
- The Illinois Appellate Court reversed, stating the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, and initially remanded for a new trial.
- On Corcoran’s motion, the Appellate Court struck the remand language, leaving a judgment that simply reversed the trial court.
- Corcoran sought review in the Illinois Supreme Court, arguing that appellate reversal on “weight of the evidence” grounds impermissibly invaded the jury’s fact-finding function and violated the Illinois constitutional right to trial by jury.

## Issues

1. Whether an Illinois appellate court may reverse a judgment after a jury verdict on the ground that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence or is against the weight of the evidence, consistent with the state constitutional right to a jury trial.
2. Whether statutory authorization for appellate review of “errors of fact” (including reversal where a judgment is not sustained by the evidence) is valid as consistent with common-law practice and the jury-trial guarantee.

## Decision

- The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Court’s reversal.
- The court held that an appellate court may set aside a jury verdict and reverse a judgment when the verdict is not supported by the evidence or is against the weight of the evidence.
- The court upheld the statutory authorization for appellate review of “errors of fact” as grounded in historical common-law practice and consistent with the constitutional right to trial by jury.
- The Appellate Court’s modification of its disposition (striking the remand language) did not alter the validity of its reversal based on evidentiary weight.

## Legal Principles

- The state constitutional right to trial by jury protects the use of a jury to determine facts in the first instance; it does not preclude appellate review that sets aside verdicts unsupported by the evidence.
- At common law, courts exercising appellate jurisdiction possessed authority to set aside verdicts when findings of fact were not supported by the evidence.
- Statutory provisions authorizing appellate courts to review “errors of fact” and reverse judgments not sustained by the evidence are consistent with the traditional jury-trial system and do not, by themselves, nullify jury fact-finding.

## Conclusion

The Illinois Supreme Court held that appellate courts may reverse judgments entered on jury verdicts that are against the weight of the evidence, and that such review—recognized at common law and authorized by statute—does not violate the Illinois constitutional right to trial by jury.


Corcoran v. City of Chicago, 27 N.E.2d 451 (Ill. 1940)