{
  "id": 2737445,
  "name": "George Siegel, Defendant in Error, v. W. P. Dickinson, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Siegel v. Dickinson",
  "decision_date": "1911-10-03",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 15,686",
  "first_page": "26",
  "last_page": "27",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "163 Ill. App. 26"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 125,
    "char_count": 1290,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.486,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.578924433977877e-08,
      "percentile": 0.44921306222872454
    },
    "sha256": "5ffac2ca15fd77ff8ebbd898fd0b1a01c410b0c4381884fec2bba3dca7daca52",
    "simhash": "1:d7699dbd5d0ea898",
    "word_count": 221
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:45:41.237543+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "George Siegel, Defendant in Error, v. W. P. Dickinson, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Me. Justice Clark\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nSuit was brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error upon a note, the note itself having been lost. The defenses were non est factum and no consideration.\nThe case was tried before the court without a jury, and there was a finding and judgment in favor of the plaintiff.\nThe argument of counsel is addressed wholly to questions of fact. We have carefully examined the abstract of record and briefs and arguments for the parties,' and are unable to say that the conclusion reached by the trial judge is erroneous. The evidence consisted largely of letters from the plaintiff in error, which go far, in our opinion, to substantiate the claim of the defendant in error.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Me. Justice Clark"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. B. Wilson, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Gustav E. Beerly, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "George Siegel, Defendant in Error, v. W. P. Dickinson, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 15,686.\nAppeals and errors\u2014when finding by court not disturbed. A finding by the court will not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless clearly and manifestly so.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. William N. G-emmill, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1909.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed October 3, 1911.\nW. B. Wilson, for plaintiff in error.\nGustav E. Beerly, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0026-01",
  "first_page_order": 46,
  "last_page_order": 47
}