{
  "id": 2854844,
  "name": "American Multigraph Sales Company, Defendant in Error, v. Globe Mutual Life Insurance Association, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "American Multigraph Sales Co. v. Globe Mutual Life Insurance",
  "decision_date": "1914-05-19",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 19,328",
  "first_page": "17",
  "last_page": "18",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "187 Ill. App. 17"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 157,
    "char_count": 1869,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.532,
    "sha256": "31d482e14796d4d2fd9c1b2454c41253d5e2e4c48cc5be65a8c633c32dd6b889",
    "simhash": "1:40f2e22dd89d30f0",
    "word_count": 312
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:57:10.884591+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "American Multigraph Sales Company, Defendant in Error, v. Globe Mutual Life Insurance Association, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "M. H. Hoey, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Haight, Brown & Haight, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "American Multigraph Sales Company, Defendant in Error, v. Globe Mutual Life Insurance Association, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 19,328.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\nSales, \u00a7 279 \u2014when acceptance and use of machine waives warranty. In an action for the purchase price of a multigraph machine, where the defense was that there was a breach of warranty, it appeared that the defendant had kept and used the machine for more than a year from the date of its delivery and that he had employed it for other purposes than that referred to in the warranty. Held that such acceptance and use of the machine constituted a waiver of the breach of warranty and that the warranty did not survive acceptance.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John R. Newcomer, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1913,\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 19, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by American Multigraph Sales Company against Globe Mutual Life Insurance Association to recover the purchase price of a multigraph machine and certain accessories. Defendant sought to avoid payment on the ground that it did not comply with a certain warranty. The contract contained the words, \u201cMachine warranted to do work as sample attached.\u201d The sample was one of defendant\u2019s circulars printed on both sides. The machine would print both sides of a circular as shown by the sample with electrotype but not with loose type, and defendant claims that the warranty related to the use of loose type and not electrotype. To reverse a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant prosecutes error.\nM. H. Hoey, for plaintiff in error.\nHaight, Brown & Haight, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0017-01",
  "first_page_order": 43,
  "last_page_order": 44
}