{
  "id": 2829594,
  "name": "Hefto Swefto, Defendant in Error, v. Tony Vasil et al., Plaintiffs in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Swefto v. Vasil",
  "decision_date": "1913-10-14",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 18,474",
  "first_page": "376",
  "last_page": "377",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "182 Ill. App. 376"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 88,
    "char_count": 879,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.534,
    "sha256": "c2188e338a74949a1224b1394444338cc521ec014d2e02ece355b0c25f8ce8a4",
    "simhash": "1:c377d1acd0ab3efd",
    "word_count": 149
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:04:20.195306+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Hefto Swefto, Defendant in Error, v. Tony Vasil et al., Plaintiffs in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Louis Brandes, for plaintiffs in error.",
      "No appearance for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Hefto Swefto, Defendant in Error, v. Tony Vasil et al., Plaintiffs in Error.\nGen. No. 18,474.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Perry L. Persons, 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 Hefto Swefto against Tony Vasil and others to recover wages earned by plaintiff while in the employ of defendants. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendants bring error.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nThe state of the record and the questions raised in this case held the same as in Pedroff v. Vasil, (Gen. No. 18,473) ante, p. 375, and for the same reasons therein stated judgment is affirmed.\nLouis Brandes, for plaintiffs in error.\nNo appearance for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0376-01",
  "first_page_order": 400,
  "last_page_order": 401
}