{
  "id": 8501166,
  "name": "Edward H. Salisbury, Plaintiff in Error, v. William E. Deutsch, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Salisbury v. Deutsch",
  "decision_date": "1913-04-21",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 17,264",
  "first_page": "633",
  "last_page": "634",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "178 Ill. App. 633"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "120 Ill. App. 422",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5305158
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/120/0422-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 177,
    "char_count": 2539,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.479,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.061447019797991e-08,
      "percentile": 0.31879213807445916
    },
    "sha256": "31abb3e518d6f48bc91fc8d71e791c5297196e70afdd1a22c5f631208ea905a8",
    "simhash": "1:928a8e159ae62e94",
    "word_count": 427
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:56:36.464744+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Edward H. Salisbury, Plaintiff in Error, v. William E. Deutsch, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Me. Presiding Justice Smith\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThe plaintiff, here the plaintiff in error, brought a suit against the defendant to recover $37.50 for one month\u2019s rent of a flat. The defendant denied liability and also filed a set-off. On a trial the jury returned a verdict for the defendant on both issues and assessed defendant\u2019s damages at $18.75, for which the court entered judgment against the plaintiff.\nThe abstract filed by the plaintiff does not comply with the rules of the court. What is termed \u00e1 \u201ccertificate of evidence,\u201d appearing in the transcript of the record, consists of 103 pages and is abstracted in less than five pages. Much of what appears to be-material evidence upon the part of the defendant is not abstracted; nor are any of the several written instruments introduced in evidence abstracted. We fail to appreciate tbe opportunity of doing the work devolving upon counsel, and are not disposed to search the record for the information that the plaintiff should have furnished in the abstract. In Thornton v. Muus, 120 Ill. App. 422, the court cites many authorities in support of the rule there announced to the effect that where an appellant furnishes an incomplete abstract, in violation of the rule, it is not the duty of the court to search the record for reversible error. There are many other authorities to the same effect, and from what appears of the case at bar in the abstract, we have no inclination to hesitate in the enforcement of the rule.\nThe judgment is affirmed.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Me. Presiding Justice Smith"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Elmer H. Adams, Dwight S. Bobb and Asa G-. Adams, for plaintiff in error.",
      "M. A. Bamborough, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Edward H. Salisbury, Plaintiff in Error, v. William E. Deutsch, Defendant in Error.\nGen. No. 17,264.\n1. Appeais Am) ERRORS \u2014 when abstract insufficient. An abstract does not comply with tbe rules of tbe appellate court where wbat is termed a \u201ccertificate of tbe evidence\u201d appearing in tbe transcript of tbe record consists of 103 pages and is abstracted in less than five pages, and where much of tbe apparently material evidence is not abstracted and none of tbe several written instruments introduced are abstracted.\n2. Appeals and errors \u2014 effect of insufficient abstract. \"Where tbe appellant furnishes an incomplete abstract, it is not tbe duty of tbe appellate court to search tbe record for reversible error.\nError to tbe Municipal Court of Chicago; tbe Hon. Robert H. Scott, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at tbe March term, 1911.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 21, 1913.\nElmer H. Adams, Dwight S. Bobb and Asa G-. Adams, for plaintiff in error.\nM. A. Bamborough, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0633-01",
  "first_page_order": 651,
  "last_page_order": 652
}