{
  "id": 5384941,
  "name": "Louis F. Strawn, Appellee, v. Nicholas Vipond, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Strawn v. Vipond",
  "decision_date": "1915-01-06",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 6,003",
  "first_page": "274",
  "last_page": "275",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "191 Ill. App. 274"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 147,
    "char_count": 1884,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.55,
    "sha256": "0617b583ad4ba8174c1b40283aa1d85bf8976c319d8bde9d55833e3015df0e8a",
    "simhash": "1:861f9844d7aba40c",
    "word_count": 310
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:18:11.463405+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Louis F. Strawn, Appellee, v. Nicholas Vipond, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Carnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Carnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "A. W. Allen and McDougall & Chapman, for appellant.",
      "Louis F. Strawn, pro se."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Louis F. Strawn, Appellee, v. Nicholas Vipond, Appellant.\nGen. No. 6,003.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\nEquity, g 425 \u2014when master's -findings not disturbed on appeal. In a suit to annul a judgment by confession on a promissory note and to restrain the collection of the note, on the ground that the consideration for the note was losses of the maker at gambling at defendant\u2019s gambling house, where evidence was conflicting and the master to whom the cause was referred found for the complainant, after hearing the witnesses, his conclusion that the weight of the testimony was in favor of complainant will not be disturbed, in the absence of a showing that he erred therein.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Livingston county; the Hon. George W. Patton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1914.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed January 6, 1915.\nStatement of the Case.\nBill in equity by Louis F. Strawn against Nicholas Vipond to annul a judgment by confession on a promissory note given by complainant to defendant and to restrain the collection of the note on the ground that the only consideration therefor was losses at gambling at defendant\u2019s saloon and gambling house.\nThe cause was referred to a master in chancery to . take evidence and report his conclusions;\nThe master found the allegations of the bill true and recommended a decree for complainant.\nObjections and exceptions were filed and overruled by the master and the chancellor, and a decree for complainant was entered in accordance with the master\u2019s findings and recommendations.\nFrom the decree, defendant prosecutes this appeal.\nA. W. Allen and McDougall & Chapman, for appellant.\nLouis F. Strawn, pro se.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0274-01",
  "first_page_order": 318,
  "last_page_order": 319
}