{
  "id": 2858670,
  "name": "J. J. Cahill, Appellee, v. George B. Dryden, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Cahill v. Dryden",
  "decision_date": "1914-06-24",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 18,892",
  "first_page": "413",
  "last_page": "413",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "187 Ill. App. 413"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 149,
    "char_count": 1707,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.551,
    "sha256": "366db9e7fc0b864ac3000814f7002d151cb62fe1ff876646175f24ba6c8bc326",
    "simhash": "1:c7ad49b85c8b93b8",
    "word_count": 287
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:57:10.884591+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. J. Cahill, Appellee, v. George B. Dryden, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Graves\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Graves"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Octigan, Zahn & Anderson, for appellant.",
      "Otto G. Ryden, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. J. Cahill, Appellee, v. George B. Dryden, Appellant.\nGen. No. 18,892.\n(Hot to he reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1325 \u2014when presumed that trial court correctly construed and applied the law. Where on the trial of a case without a jury no propositions of law or findings of fact were presented to the court to be passed on, it will he presumed that the court correctly construed and applied the law.\n2. Building and construction contracts, \u00a7 103*\u2014when finding that heat regulator worked properly sustained by the evidence. In an action to recover a balance claimed to he due for the installation of a heating plant in defendant\u2019s building by plaintiff, where the defense was that a regulator connected with the plant failed to properly regulate the heat, held that a finding for plaintiff was sustained by the evidence.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. H. Sterling Pomeroy, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed June 24, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by J. J. Cahill against George B. Dryden to recover a balance claimed to be due the plaintiff for installing a heating plant in defendant\u2019s building. The suit was originally brought before a justice of the peace where plaintiff had judgment for $80.01, and on appeal to the Circuit Court plaintiff recovered a like judgment and the costs in both courts. To reverse the judgment, defendant appeals.\nOctigan, Zahn & Anderson, for appellant.\nOtto G. Ryden, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Yols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0413-01",
  "first_page_order": 439,
  "last_page_order": 439
}