{
  "id": 5778723,
  "name": "John Prindiville v. George P. Leon",
  "name_abbreviation": "Prindiville v. Leon",
  "decision_date": "1882-11-29",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "657",
  "last_page": "658",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "11 Ill. App. 657"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "24 Ill. 464",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5284212
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/24/0464-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "17 Ill. 494",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2593007
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/17/0494-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "24 Ill. 464",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5284212
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/24/0464-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "17 Ill. 494",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2593007
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/17/0494-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 181,
    "char_count": 2467,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.564,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.1436558200146854e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7675420458876174
    },
    "sha256": "9dd0c1b42e27edcb52a233b1a3e5d701fd987d7ec02d9f55c604ed9fc186b7a7",
    "simhash": "1:47d6a56b5cf6897a",
    "word_count": 434
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:01:48.859971+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "John Prindiville v. George P. Leon."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Bailey, P. J.\nThe only question in this case is, whether ! the court below erred in allowing the plaintiff to suffer a non-suit. The action, which was assumpsit, was tried, by agree- \u2022 ment of the parties, before the court without a jury. At the close of the plaintiff\u2019s evidence, his counsel remarked \u201c That is our case,\u201d and rested, to which the defendant\u2019s counsel replied \u201c That is our case too. We will rest and submit the matter to the court.\u201d The court then remarked: \u201c Well, gentlemen, I find the issues for the defendant.\u201d And thereupon, before any note of said finding was made by either the court or clerk, the plaintiff moved for leave to enter a nonsuit, which motion, notwithstanding the objection and exception of the defendant, was granted, and a judgment of nonsuit was entered accordingly. It is insisted by the defendant that, after the finding of the court upon the issues had been announced, it was too late for the plaintiff to take a nonsuit, but that a judgment in bar should have been entered on the finding.\nThis precise question was fully considered and determined by the Supreme Court in Howe v. Harroun, 17 Ill. 494, where it was held that, in case of trials before the court without a jury, the plaintiff may take a nonsuit after the court has announced its opinion, and before a note thereof is entered. In Adams v. Shepard, 24 Ill. 464, which was an action of replevin, the court found the issues for the plaintiff, and entered such finding upon its minutes, but reserved an undetermined question of damages, and it was held that the reservation of that question placed the whole c\u00e1se in the same situation as though the court had made no minute of its finding, and that under the rule laid down in Howe v. Harroun, it was not too late for the plaintiff to submit to a nonsuit. These authorities are decisive of the present case. The judgment must be affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Bailey, P. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Rae & Smith, for appellant ;",
      "Mr. M. C. Kneip, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "John Prindiville v. George P. Leon.\nNonsuit \u2014 May be taken before entry of judgment. \u2014 A plaintiff may take a nonsuit after the court has announced its opinion, and before a note thereof is made in the docket of the judge.\nAppeal from the County Court of Cook county, the Hon. Mason B. Loomis, Judge, presiding.\nOpinion filed November 29, 1882.\nMessrs. Rae & Smith, for appellant ;\nthat the plaintiff could not take nonsuit after the judgment of the court, cited Howe v. Harroun, 17 Ill. 494; Adams v. Shepard, 24 Ill. 464.\nMr. M. C. Kneip, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0657-01",
  "first_page_order": 653,
  "last_page_order": 654
}