{
  "id": 2880862,
  "name": "Teresa Scola and Beatrice Scola, Defendants in Error, v. Luigi Scola, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Scola v. Scola",
  "decision_date": "1915-06-17",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 20,482",
  "first_page": "336",
  "last_page": "338",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "194 Ill. App. 336"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 273,
    "char_count": 3951,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.541,
    "sha256": "0faf313442008e3cfd2265908d6d20816016be3b92c1fe368f3ce30a317e3689",
    "simhash": "1:834ace0a7500f8fc",
    "word_count": 674
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:49:21.752065+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Teresa Scola and Beatrice Scola, Defendants in Error, v. Luigi Scola, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Fitch\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Fitch"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Brown & Navigato, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Cairoli Gigliotti, for defendants in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Teresa Scola and Beatrice Scola, Defendants in Error, v. Luigi Scola, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 20,482.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John K. Prindiville. Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1914.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed June 17, 1915.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction in attachment by Teresa and Beatrice Scola against Luigi Scola. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.\nOn the next day after this judgment was entered, the defendant appeared in court by counsel and moved to vacate the judgment, and it was then ordered that the judgment be opened, and that leave be given to the defendant \u201cto make his defense,\u201d the judgment to stand as security. At the same time, on defendant\u2019s motion, it was ordered, \u201cthat the plaintiffs file a statement of claim herein\u201d within five days. In response to this rule, the plaintiffs filed a \u201cbill of particulars,\u201d stating, in substance, that the \u201camount claimed by them was for money earned by one of the plaintiffs, Beatrice Scola, and her sister,\u201d which money was \u201chanded by plaintiffs to their mother, Teresa Scola, every week or every pay day for safe-keeping;\u201d that said Teresa Scola kept it on her person until she became paralyzed, \u201cabout two years ago,\u201d when it was decided to place the money in a safe deposit vault, of which the defendant, who is the husband of Teresa Scola, \u201ckept the keys;\u201d that said defendant has been unable to work for twelve years, and has been supported by his daughters; that on April 14, 1913, defendant went to the safe deposit box and took the money, \u201cwhich was the property of his daughters,\u201d amounting to $2,500, and, without the knowledge of his family, deposited $1,900 thereof with Parisi, with instructions to send it to Italy, forwarded $300 himself to Italy, and used the remainder to buy his steamship ticket to Italy, and \u201cfor exchange into Italian currency;\u201d that after defendant\u2019s departure, \u201cplaintiffs learned about his scheme, and notified Mr. Parisi that the money which he had in his possession was their money,\u201d and that they would hold him liable for the same.\nBrown & Navigato, for plaintiff in error.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Pleading, \u00a7 334 \u2014when hill of particulars not a pleading. A bill of particulars, not attached to a declaration or statement of a claim, but filed afterwards in compliance with a rule entered upon the plaintiffs to file such a bill, is not a pleading.\n2. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 747 \u2014when hiil of particulars not part of record. A bill of particulars filed in compliance with a rule to file such bill, and not mentioned in a bill of exceptions, is not a part of the record.\n3. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 1593 \u2014when statement of claim cured hy finding and judgment. Where no objection to a statement of claim is made until after judgment, and such statement of claim contains terms sufficiently general to include, by fair and reasonable intendment, any matter necessary to be proved, and without proof of which no finding or judgment could have been entered, the want of an express averment of such matter in the pleading is cured by the finding and judgment.\n4. Municipal Goubt oe Chicago, \u00a7 13 \u2014when statement of claim sufficient. A statement of claim in attachment action held to contain terms sufficiently general to include, by fair and reasonable intendment, an averment that the money taken by the defendant belonged to the plaintiffs at the time of suit.\n5. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 1303 \u2014when evidence presumed to sustain judgment. In the absence of any bill of exceptions containing the evidence heard by the trial court, it will be presumed, upon appeal or error, that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the judgment.\nCairoli Gigliotti, for defendants in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0336-01",
  "first_page_order": 358,
  "last_page_order": 360
}