{
  "id": 2840266,
  "name": "W. W. Wilcox Company, Defendant in Error, v. J. E. Ingram, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "W. W. Wilcox Co. v. Ingram",
  "decision_date": "1913-12-04",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 18,557",
  "first_page": "49",
  "last_page": "50",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "184 Ill. App. 49"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 128,
    "char_count": 1409,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.555,
    "sha256": "7359cf0612a34f54aef2a4f3322cb354a56b1ce1521850e1236b14f489f1affe",
    "simhash": "1:d717f003552a28fc",
    "word_count": 243
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:47:41.859813+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "W. W. Wilcox Company, Defendant in Error, v. J. E. Ingram, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Simon T. Sutton and H. J. Rosenberg, for plaintiff in error; James D. Power, of counsel.",
      "E. C. Ferguson, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "W. W. Wilcox Company, Defendant in Error, v. J. E. Ingram, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 18,557.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Charles E. Jennings, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed December 4, 1913,\nnunc pro tunc as of December 2, 1913.\nRehearing denied December 16, 1913.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by W. W. Wilcox Company, a corporation, against J. E. Ingram on a claim for goods sold and delivered, work and materials furnished, money received by defendant for use of plaintiff, interest on divers sums of money and money due on account stated. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff for $368.19, defendant brings error.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nMunicipal court of Chicago, \u00a7 26*\u2014when stenographic report improperly filed nunc pro tunc. Where a stenographic report is presented to and signed by the trial judge within apt time, an order of court entered nearly eight months thereafter permitting it to be filed nunc pro tunc as of the day it was presented to and signed by the trial judge is void and of no effect, and the stenographic report may on motion be stricken from the record.\nSimon T. Sutton and H. J. Rosenberg, for plaintiff in error; James D. Power, of counsel.\nE. C. Ferguson, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0049-01",
  "first_page_order": 73,
  "last_page_order": 74
}