#### Sam Frankenstein, Defendant in Error, v. Max Weber and David Weber, Copartners, trading as Weber Brothers, Plaintiffs in Error.

Gen. No. 19,198.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh J. Kearns, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1913.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed October 7, 1914.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Sam Frankenstein against Max Weber and David Weber, copartners, trading as Weber Brothers, to recover a balance alleged to be due for goods, wares and merchandise sold and delivered. Upon a trial by the court there was a finding and judgment against defendants for the amount claimed to be due. To reverse the judgment, defendants bring error.

A. L. Weber, for plaintiffs in error.

Isaac Anderson Loeb, for defendant in error.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Yols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number*

Mr. Presiding Justice Baume

delivered the opinion of the court.

*574Abstract of the Decision.

1. Municipal Court of Chicago, § 26 * —sufficiency of statement of facts. The record does not contain a correct statement of facts, where what purports to he such a statement is merely a statement that certain witnesses testified to certain facts, in substance, as there stated in narrative form.

2. Sales, § 329*—sufficiency of evidence. On review of a judgment for the purchase price of goods sold and delivered, evidence in the record as presented held to show an original promise by defendants to pay for the articles furnished.