
    Filippo Ganguzza, Plaintiff in Error, v. Marshall E. Sampsell, Receiver, Defendant in Error.
    Gen. No. 18,806.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Appeal and error, § 1017
      
      —when bill of exceptions must contain all the evidence. Error in giving an instruction claimed not to have been supported by the evidence will not be considered where the hill of exceptions does not give all the evidence, or a complete synopsis thereof in narrative form.
    2. Instructions, § 151
      
      —when embodied in instruction given. Plaintiff’s instruction as to effect of the number of witnesses on either side may he refused where it is fully covered by defendant’s instruction.
    3. Trial, § 128
      
      —when testimony is not misread to jury. A charge that counsel misstated to the jury the testimony of a witness in a street railroad accident case by adding the words “at Ohio street” to an answer is not sustained, where counsel insisted he was reading from his own notes, there was no showing he was reading from a stenographic report of the evidence, and as a fair inference the street was referred to in the question and the jury were instructed not to decide the case upon statements of counsel outside of the evidence.
    
      Error to the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Homer Abbott, Judge, presiding.
    Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed December 2, 1913.
    Rehearing denied December 16, 1913.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by Filippo Ganguzza against Marshall E. Sampsell, sole surviving receiver of the Chicago Union Traction Company, to recover damages for personal injuries sustained from the sudden starting of a street car. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff brings error.
    Harry W. Standidge, for plaintiff in error.
    Joseph D. Ryan and William H. Symmes, for defendant in error; John R. Guilliams and Frank L. Kriete, of counsel.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Clark

delivered the opinion of the court  