#### Charles Zenisek, Appellee, v. Chicago Consolidated Bottling Company, Appellant.

Gen. No. 22,330.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Appeal and error, § 1165 * —what questions presented for review. On appeal from a judgment for plaintiff in an action to recover for injury to his automobile as a result of a collision with defendant’s motor truck, alleged to have been due to defendant’s negligence, the only question presented for review, where defendant does not discuss the findings of the jury or the question of negligence, is that of the amount of the verdict.

2. Automobiles and garages, § 3*—when amount of verdict sustained by evidence. In an action to recover for injury to plaintiff’s automobile in a collision with defendant’s motor truck, alleged to have been due to defendant’s negligence, evidence held to sustain a verdict of $425 for plaintiff.

Appeal from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. J. J. Cooke, judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1916.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed October 30, 1916.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Charles Zenisek, plaintiff, against the Chicago Consolidated Bottling Company, defendant, in the County Court of Cook county, to recover damages for injury to plaintiff’s automobile in a collision with defendant’s motor truck, alleged to have been due to defendant’s negligence. From a judgment for plaintiff for $425, defendant appeals.

Daniel L. Madden and Thomas F. Burke, for appellant.

Charles V. Barrett, for appellee.

*

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

Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.