{
  "id": 5372921,
  "name": "Ferdinand C. Niemeyer, Defendant in Error, v. Gust Berg and Joseph Brabec, Plaintiffs in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Niemeyer v. Berg",
  "decision_date": "1914-04-23",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 19,185",
  "first_page": "107",
  "last_page": "109",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "186 Ill. App. 107"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 207,
    "char_count": 3077,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.525,
    "sha256": "d297a8863251e7c26f6d24305f2ca8025b71d3e26ebd617238e5fcb39f10699e",
    "simhash": "1:df850da88c2f52df",
    "word_count": 516
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:18:25.002075+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Ferdinand C. Niemeyer, Defendant in Error, v. Gust Berg and Joseph Brabec, Plaintiffs in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gridley\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n3. Judgment, \u00a7 187 \u2014when judgment against \u201cthe defendant\u201d in action against two defendants cannot he sustained. In an action of tort against two defendants, tried by the court without a jury, where the finding of the court as recorded is against \u201cthe defendant,\u201d without naming him, a judgment on such finding cannot be sustained, since it is uncertain which one of the defendants was found guilty and against which one the judgment was rendered.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gridley"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Winston, Payne, Strawn & Shaw, for plaintiffs in error; John C. Slade, of counsel.",
      "William Reeda, for defendant in error; Park Phipps, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Ferdinand C. Niemeyer, Defendant in Error, v. Gust Berg and Joseph Brabec, Plaintiffs in Error.\nGen. No. 19,185.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph S. LaBuy, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1913.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed April 23, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction in tort by Ferdinand C. Niemeyer against Gust Berg and Joseph Brabec in the Municipal Court of Chicago. Plaintiff\u2019s statement of claim alleged that the defendants pretended to assign to plaintiff a certain lease then existing between the defendants as lessor and lessee of certain premises; that the lessor, Berg, represented that it would be necessary for plaintiff to deposit one hundred and fifty dollars as security for the payment of the last two months\u2019 rent under said lease before he would accept plaintiff as assignee, knowing at the time that the defendant Brabec had previously assigned said lease to another party, and that by reason of the false and fraudulent representations plaintiff paid Brabec and that said lease had never been assigned to plaintiff. The court found 6 4 the defendant guilty in the manner and form as charged in the plaintiff\u2019s statement of claim\u201d and assessed plaintiff\u2019s damages 4 4at the sum of one hundred and fifty dollars in tort,\u201d and the court adjudged that plaintiff have judgment on the finding, it not appearing that at any time the cause was dismissed as to either one of the defendants. To reverse the judgment, defendants bring error.\nWinston, Payne, Strawn & Shaw, for plaintiffs in error; John C. Slade, of counsel.\nWilliam Reeda, for defendant in error; Park Phipps, of counsel.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Munichpad Court of Chicago, \u00a7 13a \u2014when proof limited to claim as made. In an action of the fourth class in the Municipal court a party is limited in his evidence to his claim as made, or as amended.\n2. Fraud, \u00a7 115 \u2014when judgment for plaintiff not sustained 6y proof of fraudulent representations. In an action of the fourth class in the Municipal Court, where the gist of plaintiff\u2019s claim was that because of false and fraudulent representations plaintiff was induced to part with a certain sum for which he never received any consideration, by reason of which he was damaged, held that a judgment for plaintiff could not be sustained for the reason that there was no sufficient proof of the alleged false and fraudulent representations.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV and Cumulative Quarterly, samel topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0107-01",
  "first_page_order": 153,
  "last_page_order": 155
}