{
  "id": 2898172,
  "name": "Richardson Silk Company, Appellee, v. D. Raymond Mead, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Richardson Silk Co. v. Mead",
  "decision_date": "1914-10-13",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 5,914",
  "first_page": "233",
  "last_page": "233",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "190 Ill. App. 233"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 153,
    "char_count": 1833,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.531,
    "sha256": "d1f3c95178bab4a1fa482645aae100660e1c43ea5c4388443b1a5e258f08f902",
    "simhash": "1:b7ce8206566c0af9",
    "word_count": 319
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:39:36.956740+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Richardson Silk Company, Appellee, v. D. Raymond Mead, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Dibell\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Dibell"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Fisher & North, for appellant.",
      "No appearance for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Richardson Silk Company, Appellee, v. D. Raymond Mead, Appellant.\nGen. No. 5,914.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Estoppel, \u00a7 82 \u2014effect of silence and acquiescence as to title. Where plaintiff placed silk cabinets with a customer on consignment to be used by the customer as long as he continued to buy silk of plaintiff, and such customer sold his store to another and plaintiff acquiesced in the sale, and the purchaser transferred the store to the defendant who paid for the store and sold the cabinets in question, in an action to recover the full value of the cabinets, held that he could not maintain the action for the full contract price.\n2. Sales, \u00a7 221*\u2014when purchaser from buyer not liable for price. Where a party placed goods in a store with a customer on consignment and acquiesced in the sale of a store to another, he cannot thus' ratify the sale and reject the payment for the goods in question by still another purchaser so as to recover from such other purchaser when .the goods were sold by him.\n3. Assumpsit, action of, \u00a7 5*\u2014effect of action as waiving tort. Where goods on consignment are- sold by the consignee the tort is waived by a suit in assumpsit.\nAppeal from the County Court of Winnebago county; the Hon. Louis M. Reckhow, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1914.\nReversed with finding of facts.\nOpinion filed October 13, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction in assumpsit by Richardson Silk Company against D. Raymond Mead to recover $206 as the purchase price of two silk cabinets. From a verdict and judgment for $25, defendant appeals.\nFisher & North, for appellant.\nNo appearance for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Yols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0233-01",
  "first_page_order": 255,
  "last_page_order": 255
}