{
  "id": 2848929,
  "name": "Daniel W. Mellon, Appellee, v. Conrad Seipp Brewing Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Mellon v. Conrad Seipp Brewing Co.",
  "decision_date": "1914-02-04",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 18,378",
  "first_page": "157",
  "last_page": "158",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "185 Ill. App. 157"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 151,
    "char_count": 1888,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.534,
    "sha256": "d9dfd582985851287f10f959696601a7ed8626f4736847744d459a8b76d9038c",
    "simhash": "1:0fd1082d46bd3cd9",
    "word_count": 309
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:43:38.716309+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Daniel W. Mellon, Appellee, v. Conrad Seipp Brewing Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Baume\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Appeal and error, \u00a7 972 \u2014when objections to master\u2019s findings not presented for review. Where the only questions raised by appellant upon the record relate to the findings of a master, as embodied in the decree, upon the issues of fact involved, the absence of any objections and exceptions to such findings precludes a review of such questions on appeal.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Baume"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Wiestoe, Payee, Strawe & Shaw, for appellant; Arthur C; Marriott, of counsel.",
      "Chester Firebaugh and Heery W. Huttmaee, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Daniel W. Mellon, Appellee, v. Conrad Seipp Brewing Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 18,378.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Appear and error, \u00a7 972 \u2014when exceptions to master\u2019s report are not preserved in the record. Where objections to a master\u2019s report do not appear in the abstract of the record itself, although the decree recites that the objections to the master\u2019s report stood as exceptions thereto on the hearing before the chancellor, such exceptions are not preserved in the record.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Kick-ham Scanran, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1912.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed February 4, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nBill filed by Daniel W. Mellon against Conrad Seipp Brewing Company for an accounting and for a cancellation of a certain assignment by complainant to defendant of a dramshop license and for a return of said license to complainant. The cause was referred to a master, the master\u2019s report was approved by the chancellor, and a decree was entered in substantial conformity with the master\u2019s findings and recommendations. To reverse the decree, defendant appeals.\nWiestoe, Payee, Strawe & Shaw, for appellant; Arthur C; Marriott, of counsel.\nChester Firebaugh and Heery W. Huttmaee, for appellee.\nSee IUinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vole. XI to XV, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0157-01",
  "first_page_order": 183,
  "last_page_order": 184
}