{
  "id": 2837863,
  "name": "Richmond-Smith Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. William J. Richardson, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Richmond-Smith Co. v. Richardson",
  "decision_date": "1913-11-04",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 18,550",
  "first_page": "204",
  "last_page": "205",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "183 Ill. App. 204"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 143,
    "char_count": 1483,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.542,
    "sha256": "14de96e6e376e6fa1a2921868f6716fc5a2708a4e144413961d6c55465506928",
    "simhash": "1:cb730b7510ba39d8",
    "word_count": 248
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:57:27.806602+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Richmond-Smith Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. William J. Richardson, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Clark\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Clark"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "William A. Bowles and James E. Bowles, for plaintiff in error; William L. Hart, of counsel.",
      "Jones, Bryant, Keener, Ring & Posvic, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Richmond-Smith Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. William J. Richardson, Defendant in Error.\nGen. No. 18,550.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Harry Olson,Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.\nReversed and judgment here.\nOpinion filed November 4, 1913.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Sales, \u00a7 15 \u2014when contract of sale not void for want of mutuality. A contract for the sale of milk consisting of a written order signed by two persons requesting seller to ship milk daily to one of the two, the schedule of price being given and there being incorporated an agreement to receive the milk during a certain period of time, held not void for want of mutuality.\"\n2. Appeal and error, \u00a7 367 \u2014when defenses not reviewable. Defenses alleged in affidavit of merits not relied upon at the trial cannot be considered.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Richmond-Smith Company, a corporation, against William J. Richardson and Mat Anderson to recover for milk sold and delivered to defendants by plaintiff. Service was had only on William J. Richardson. From a judgment in favor of William J. Richardson, plaintiff brings error.\nWilliam A. Bowles and James E. Bowles, for plaintiff in error; William L. Hart, of counsel.\nJones, Bryant, Keener, Ring & Posvic, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XIV, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0204-01",
  "first_page_order": 226,
  "last_page_order": 227
}