#### Mike Metas, Appellee, v. Peter Sanichas, Appellant.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

• Compromise and settlement, § 4 * —authority to compromise suit. In an action to recover damages resulting from defendant *187compromising, without authority, a suit instituted by plaintiff against a third party and receipting for the money in the name of plaintiff, a verdict in favor of plaintiff held to be manifestly against the weight of the evidence, the defendant’s evidence showing that defendant was authorized to take care of the case and to apply the amount collected on an account due him from plaintiff.

*186Appeal from the Circuit Court of Vermilion county; the Hon. William B. Scholeield, Judge, presiding.

Heard in this court at the April term, 1913.

Reversed with finding of fact.

Opinion filed October 16, 1913.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Mike Metas against Peter Sanichas to recover damages alleged to have been occasioned by the defendant compromising, without authority, a certain suit instituted by plaintiff against a third party. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals.

Clark & Hutton, for appellant.

Oliver D. Mann, for appellee.

*

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

Mr. Justice Creighton

delivered the opinion of the court.