{
  "id": 5382233,
  "name": "Max Luster, Plaintiff in Error, v. Arthur Steingard, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Luster v. Steingard",
  "decision_date": "1915-03-08",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 20,710",
  "first_page": "573",
  "last_page": "573",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "191 Ill. App. 573"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 110,
    "char_count": 1292,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.505,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.298132930532853e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3341416816192759
    },
    "sha256": "c382049cbabe0e0ada51c5cf62fd79229d9736eee1ef6df606ab70583b51c1eb",
    "simhash": "1:f3c32f97c80c80f9",
    "word_count": 212
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:18:11.463405+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Max Luster, Plaintiff in Error, v. Arthur Steingard, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Baker\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Baker"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Ernest C. Reniff, for plaintiff in error.",
      "No appearance for defendant in error"
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Max Luster, Plaintiff in Error, v. Arthur Steingard, Defendant in Error.\nGen. No. 20,710.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\nAttorney and client, \u00a7 133 \u2014when burden on defendant to show negligence in action by attorney for services. In an action by an attorney to recover for services rendered in defending an action against defendant, where the defense is plaintiff\u2019s negligence, the burden of showing such negligence is on defendant; and where no evidence of negligence is offered, but the jury finds a verdict for defendant, plaintiff\u2019s motion for a new trial should be granted.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh X Kearns, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1914.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed March 8, 1915.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Max Luster against Arthur Steingard to recover for services rendered in defending an action against defendant.\nTo reverse a judgment for defendant for two thousand dollars on the verdict of the jury, plaintiff prosecutes this writ of error.\nErnest C. Reniff, for plaintiff in error.\nNo appearance for defendant in error\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vole. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0573-01",
  "first_page_order": 617,
  "last_page_order": 617
}