{
  "id": 2833425,
  "name": "Louis Rosenfeld, Defendant in Error, v. Nathan Pomerantz and Harry Pomerantz, Plaintiffs in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Rosenfeld v. Pomerantz",
  "decision_date": "1913-10-14",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 18,533",
  "first_page": "341",
  "last_page": "341",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "182 Ill. App. 341"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 122,
    "char_count": 1340,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.528,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.4033266686372354e-08,
      "percentile": 0.339334069283576
    },
    "sha256": "d4ada2fb8395b8880dbf8ec56e39d75555d9a992996f24c5f82911c447f928ef",
    "simhash": "1:cf3990a5108f2199",
    "word_count": 226
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:04:20.195306+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Louis Rosenfeld, Defendant in Error, v. Nathan Pomerantz and Harry Pomerantz, Plaintiffs in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice F. A. Smith\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice F. A. Smith"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Shaeffer & Kompel, for plaintiffs in error.",
      "Israel Cowen, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Louis Rosenfeld, Defendant in Error, v. Nathan Pomerantz and Harry Pomerantz, Plaintiffs in Error.\nGen. No. 18,533.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Municipal court of Chicago, \u00a7 26 \u2014sufficiency of statement of facts for review. A statement of facts signed by the trial judge which consists of a statement of the evidence is not such a statement of facts as is contemplated by the Municipal Court Act.\n2. Trial, \u00a7 295*\u2014when propositions of Jaw must be submitted. Propositions of law and findings of facts submitted to the court after entry of judgment and after a writ of error has been sued out may be refused by the trial court.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Feed C. Hill, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed October 14, 1913.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Louis Rosenfeld against Nathan Pomerantz and Harry Pomerantz to recover wages earned by plaintiff while in the employ of defendants. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff for one hundred and fifty-three dollars, defendants bring error.\nShaeffer & Kompel, for plaintiffs in error.\nIsrael Cowen, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XIV, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0341-01",
  "first_page_order": 365,
  "last_page_order": 365
}