{
  "id": 2740195,
  "name": "J. A. Meath, Defendant in Error, v. H. B. Moll et al. Plaintiffs in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Meath v. Moll",
  "decision_date": "1911-10-05",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 15,744",
  "first_page": "425",
  "last_page": "426",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "163 Ill. App. 425"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 154,
    "char_count": 1780,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.532,
    "sha256": "30c16b2c72e187687a8c8a6e62f15c8af2cca3bfacfbeaabfb93d576898271c6",
    "simhash": "1:deab182c32c73648",
    "word_count": 302
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:45:41.237543+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. A. Meath, Defendant in Error, v. H. B. Moll et al. Plaintiffs in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Smith\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThe plaintiff, the defendant in error here, was a licensed broker in Chicago. The defendants, the plaintiffs in error here, owned and conducted a rooming house. The plaintiff took certain persons to said defendants and showed them the house in an attempt to sell same. Among them was Mrs. Jones who afterward purchased the place without the knowledge of the plaintiff, who upon learning of the sale claimed a commission, but failing to collect same brought suit. The cause was submitted to the court without a jury. The court found the issues for the plaintiff; assessed the damages at the sum' of $145 and entered judgment therefor.\nThe testimony was conflicting and if the court concluded that the preponderance of the evidence was in favor of the plaintiff the finding was proper and we are not inclined to hold that the same was clearly and manifestly against the weight of the evidence.\nIt also appears from the record that certain documents were introduced in evidence on the trial but same were neither read into the record nor shown here as exhibits. ^ The judgment is affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Smith"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "George R. Neff, for plaintiffs in error.",
      "Charles Hughes, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. A. Meath, Defendant in Error, v. H. B. Moll et al. Plaintiffs in Error.\nGen. No. 15,744.\nMunicipal Court\u2014when judgment not disturbed. A judgment of the Municipal Court will not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless clearly and manifestly so, especially where all of the evidence which was before the trial judge is not preserved on review.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. William N. Gemmill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1909.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed October 5, 1911.\nGeorge R. Neff, for plaintiffs in error.\nCharles Hughes, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0425-01",
  "first_page_order": 445,
  "last_page_order": 446
}