#### Joseph M. Laughlin, Defendant in Error, v. William M. Hopkinson, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 17,251.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Frauds, § 100 * —when evidence of other transactions, inadmissible. In an action for fraud and deceit practiced by defendant in selling a part interest in a store, evidence of sale by defendant to another held inadmissible to show fraudulent intention.

2. Damaqes, § 153 * —when verdict excessive in action for fraud and deceit. In an action for damages resulting from false and fraudulent representations, a verdict for $20,000 held palpably excessive.

Error to the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1912.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed November 29, 1913.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Joseph M. Laughlin against William M. Hopkinson to recover damages resulting from false and fraudulent representations made to plaintiff by defendant whereby plaintiff was induced to pay defendant six thousand two hundred dollars for a one-half interest in a clothing store. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff for twenty thousand dollars, defendant brings error.

Charles B. Stafford, for plaintiff in error; A. N. Waterman, Thurman, Stafford & Hume and C. B. Haffenberg, of counsel.

Mayer, Meyer, Austrian & Platt, for defendant in error.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XIV, same topic and section number,

Mr. Justice Brown

delivered the opinion of the court.