{
  "id": 2901999,
  "name": "Frank T. Baird, Defendant in Error, v. Gustav K. Nelson, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Baird v. Nelson",
  "decision_date": "1914-12-22",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 20,141",
  "first_page": "111",
  "last_page": "112",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "190 Ill. App. 111"
    }
  ],
  "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": 1667,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.552,
    "sha256": "271edbba634b5d835260a7efa8ee10a25555f22443ea36e213e71bde5de6bfc9",
    "simhash": "1:8b59ca31960d23fd",
    "word_count": 273
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:39:36.956740+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Frank T. Baird, Defendant in Error, v. Gustav K. Nelson, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nBrokers, \u00a7 51 \u2014what constitutes procuring cause of sale. Where it appeared that the owner and purchaser of property were brought \u2022together through an agent in June, 1912, when the sale was effected, and plaintiff had submitted the property to the same party about April, 1911, but negotiations for its sale ceased after September, 1911, and plaintiff never disclosed the name of the prospective purchaser to the owner or his agent, nor the name of the owner to the prospective purchaser, though requested to do so, and the prospective purchaser did not accept the terms submitted by the plaintiff, the evidence is held to show that the negotiations between the plaintiff and the purchaser were abandoned and that the plaintiff\u2019s efforts were not the procuring cause of the sale such as to entitle him to recover commissions.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Martin & Martin, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Francis A. McDonnell, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Frank T. Baird, Defendant in Error, v. Gustav K. Nelson, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 20,141.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph E. Ryan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1914.\nReversed.\nOpinion filed December 22, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Frank T. Baird against Gustav K. Nelson for real estate commissions alleged to be due for procuring a purchaser for defendant\u2019s premises. From a judgment against defendant in favor of plaintiff, defendant brings error.\nMartin & Martin, for plaintiff in error.\nFrancis A. McDonnell, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0111-01",
  "first_page_order": 133,
  "last_page_order": 134
}