{
  "id": 2858953,
  "name": "S. F. Sayrs, Defendant in Error, v. John Yangas and E. F. Thompson, Plaintiffs in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Sayrs v. Yangas",
  "decision_date": "1914-05-19",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 19,554",
  "first_page": "23",
  "last_page": "24",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "187 Ill. App. 23"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 163,
    "char_count": 1993,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.54,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.2240919645422112e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6024619582068298
    },
    "sha256": "271adb36ee09aa88e20283cc86d0017a928d8e2b7e48bb1b71d0e834e65f19a8",
    "simhash": "1:9d57c641281970e9",
    "word_count": 354
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:57:10.884591+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "S. F. Sayrs, Defendant in Error, v. John Yangas and E. F. Thompson, Plaintiffs in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Charles T. Farson and Francis H. Clark, for plaintiffs in error.",
      "M. B. Waltz and Henry T. Chace, Jr., for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "S. F. Sayrs, Defendant in Error, v. John Yangas and E. F. Thompson, Plaintiffs in Error.\nGen. No. 19,554.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Damages, \u00a7 230 \u2014right to a jury to assess damages on default. Where a default is taken against defendants for want of a sufficient affidavit of merits, they are not entitled to a jury to assess the damages where no specific demand for a jury was made after the default, notwithstanding they demanded a jury on entering their appearance.\n2. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1877*\u2014defenses to action on stay bond. In an action on a stay bond given in a case where a judgment for rent and possession of premises was affirmed, an affidavit of merits presenting a set-off for the value of the improvements made on the premises, held not a proper defense to the action.\n3. Municipal Court oe Chicago, \u00a7 19*\u2014when entry of judgment against one joint defendant no bar to entry of joint judgment. In an action on a stay bond in the Municipal Court, the fact that a judgment was entered against one of two defendants held not to release the other from further liability, where the judgment was vacated within thirty days from the entry of the judgment and a joint judgment was entered against them,\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. James C. Martin, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1913.\nAffirmed.\nOpinon filed May 19, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by S. F. Sayrs against John Tangas and E. F. Thompson as principal and surety respectively on a stay bond given in a case wherein a judgment for rent and possession of the premises was affirmed. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendants bring error.\nCharles T. Farson and Francis H. Clark, for plaintiffs in error.\nM. B. Waltz and Henry T. Chace, Jr., for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0023-01",
  "first_page_order": 49,
  "last_page_order": 50
}