{
  "id": 2841589,
  "name": "Frank L. Tuttle, Appellee, v. Helen M. Newbold, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Tuttle v. Newbold",
  "decision_date": "1913-12-02",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 18,825",
  "first_page": "37",
  "last_page": "38",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "184 Ill. App. 37"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 127,
    "char_count": 1422,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.512,
    "sha256": "edc3eb353999fcdbda0b312f4c42bd8987d07f219414be7cc0f0d5187ca8431e",
    "simhash": "1:96200085d02a8a58",
    "word_count": 232
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:47:41.859813+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Frank L. Tuttle, Appellee, v. Helen M. Newbold, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Clark\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Clark"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Joseph B. Fleming, for appellant.",
      "Henry R. Rathbone, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Frank L. Tuttle, Appellee, v. Helen M. Newbold, Appellant.\nGen. No. 18,825.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Jacob H. Hopkins, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed December 2, 1913.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Frank L. Tuttle against Helen M. New-bold to recover on a claim for services and disbursements alleged to have been performed and made by one Welch. Plaintiff sues as assignee of said claim. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff for $1,409.79, defendant appeals.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Account, action on, \u00a7 1*\u2014when verdict sustained by the evidence. In an action to recover on an account for services and disbursements assigned to plaintiff, a verdict for plaintiff held not manifestly against the weight of the evidence.\n2. Evidence, \u00a7 164*\u2014when letter is not self-serving. Where an attorney writes to his client letters in the nature of demands for payment of his fees and disbursements, and the client replies promising payment, the attorney\u2019s letters are not inadmissible, in an action to recover for his services, as self-serving declarations and the client\u2019s letters are admissible as admissions. Following Welch v. Newbold, Gen. No. 18,818, ante. p. 36.\nJoseph B. Fleming, for appellant.\nHenry R. Rathbone, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0037-01",
  "first_page_order": 61,
  "last_page_order": 62
}