{
  "id": 5380866,
  "name": "George L. Williams, Appellee, v. Assets Adjustment Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Williams v. Assets Adjustment Co.",
  "decision_date": "1915-03-08",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 20,562",
  "first_page": "560",
  "last_page": "561",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "191 Ill. App. 560"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 180,
    "char_count": 2186,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.54,
    "sha256": "2b01d62be34374a906adb326eaca87cc32f9ea612cf070cce12756388cbd19d5",
    "simhash": "1:6855c2f35c88289a",
    "word_count": 379
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:18:11.463405+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "George L. Williams, Appellee, v. Assets Adjustment Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Baker\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Baker"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Julian C. Ryer, for appellant.",
      "H. C. Dawson, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "George L. Williams, Appellee, v. Assets Adjustment Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 20,562.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. John M. O\u2019Connor, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1914.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed March 8, 1915,\nRehearing denied March 22, 1915.\nStatement of the Case.\nBill by George L. Williams against Assets Adjustment Company, a corporation, to compel the defendant to deliver to complainant two promissory notes made by complainant and one Osby and to enjoin defendant from disposing of said notes or attempting to collect complainant\u2019s wages under an assignment thereof, and that his employer be directed to pay such wages to complainant.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nI. Equity, \u00a7 295 \u2014when filing of replication waived. When the record does not show that a cause was formally set for hearing on the bill and answer, and it was heard on bill, answer and proofs, the filing of a replication is waived.\n2. Trim,, \u00a7 13*\u2014when cam.se treated as at issue. Where, after a hearing on the bill answer and proofs taken in court, defendant\u2019s attorney gives notice that he will ask that the cause be set down for rehearing and for leave to introduce evidence for defendant, ke treats the cause at issue.\n3. Equity, \u00a7 366*\u2014when cause treated as heard on hill and answer. A cause will be treated as heard on bill and answer only when the decree shows that it was so heard or the record shows that the defendant gave complainant notice of the filing of his answer.\n4. Equity, \u00a7 207*\u2014what effect of waiver of replication. When the replication is waived, the findings of the decree are taken as true on appeal, and the decree will be affirmed if the findings of fact are sufficient to support it.\nFrom a decree granting the relief sought which recited that the cause was heard on the bill, the answer and the proofs taken in court, the defendant not appearing by counsel or otherwise, defendant appeals.\nJulian C. Ryer, for appellant.\nH. C. Dawson, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0560-01",
  "first_page_order": 604,
  "last_page_order": 605
}