{
  "id": 2908889,
  "name": "Fulton Packing Company, Appellant, v. Anton J. Cermak et al., Appellees",
  "name_abbreviation": "Fulton Packing Co. v. Cermak",
  "decision_date": "1914-11-10",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 19,882",
  "first_page": "412",
  "last_page": "413",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "189 Ill. App. 412"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 200,
    "char_count": 2350,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.509,
    "sha256": "2316f28414cb4c385f722c836fbb46e12287a59a9aa671e64682e3942187ccd4",
    "simhash": "1:af3633e34c253708",
    "word_count": 398
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:38:10.053698+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Fulton Packing Company, Appellant, v. Anton J. Cermak et al., Appellees."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Henry M. Hagan, for appellant.",
      "Blum, Wolfsohn & Blum, for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Fulton Packing Company, Appellant, v. Anton J. Cermak et al., Appellees.\nGen. No. 19,882.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. John A. Dowdall, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1913.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed November 10, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction of replevin by Fulton Packing Company, a corporation, against Anton J. Cermak and others. On the day of the trial, an order of court was entered requiring plaintiff to produce at the trial certain books and documents pertinent to the issue. Later in the day the case came up for trial before another judge. When this order was brought to his attention by filing a copy thereof, another order of the same purport was entered requiring plaintiff to produce some of the same books and documents at two o\u2019clock of the same day, and the hearing was continued to that time to enable plaintiff to comply with the order. At that hour, plaintiff\u2019s counsel stated that he went to plaintiff\u2019s plant about a mile away; that the bookkeeper was out; that he and plaintiff\u2019s secretary made' a search for the papers called for and were unable to find any books excepting a stub check book then produced. No other explanation was given and no further time was asked for. No further information being vouchsafed as to plaintiff\u2019s willingness or readiness to comply with the orders, the court, on defendant\u2019s motion, discharged the jury, dismissed the case and ordered that a writ of retorno habendo issue for the property taken under the replevin writ. To reverse the judgment, plaintiff appeals.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nDissmissal nonsuit and discontinuance, \u00a7 39 \u2014when suit may he dismissed on failure of plaintiff to comply with order to produce hooks. In an action of replevin, where plaintiff failed to comply with an order of the court to produce certain books and documents pertinent to the issue and made no showing of a reasonable effort or want of opportunity to do so, held that the court was justified in dismissing the suit and ordering a writ of retorno hahendo to issue.\nHenry M. Hagan, for appellant.\nBlum, Wolfsohn & Blum, for appellees.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, end Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0412-01",
  "first_page_order": 438,
  "last_page_order": 439
}