Disbelief of Oral Testimony Does Not Necessarily Indicate That the Reverse of That Testimony Is True

In Gold v. Ziff Communications, Co., 196 Ill. App. 3d 425, 433, 553 N.E.2d 404, 142 Ill. Dec. 890 (1989), the defendant argued that the plaintiffs had failed to prove an element of their case. Gold, 196 Ill. App. 3d at 432-33. The appellate court noted that the plaintiffs put on their evidence and that the defendant was given the opportunity to cross-examine the plaintiffs' witnesses and to put on evidence of its own, but the defendant did not provide any evidence to contradict the plaintiffs' evidence. Gold, 196 Ill. App. 3d at 433. The court held that "disbelief of oral testimony cannot support an affirmative finding that the reverse of that testimony is true, that is, it cannot supply a want of proof." Gold, 196 Ill. App. 3d at 433.