{
  "id": 2877605,
  "name": "Gust F. Hesch, Plaintiff in Error, v. Charles J. Dennis and James Bakakos, Defendants in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hesch v. Dennis",
  "decision_date": "1915-10-05",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 20,372",
  "first_page": "663",
  "last_page": "664",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "194 Ill. App. 663"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 259,
    "char_count": 4391,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.548,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.814609318593646e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4970160422480229
    },
    "sha256": "9d7e45628595e72c17624d8f7f0202cd3158dc319eac5cee3064d910edb812df",
    "simhash": "1:a39dc015d9012610",
    "word_count": 738
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:49:21.752065+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Gust F. Hesch, Plaintiff in Error, v. Charles J. Dennis and James Bakakos, Defendants in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Bills and notes, \u00a7 56 \u2014when failure of consideration not defense. In an action to recover on a promissory note given as part of the purchase price of a leasehold interest in and equipment of a theater, where defendants retained possession and made no attempt to rescind, a judgment for defendants held erroneous, there being no evidence of fraud or failure of consideration, or of a subsequent valid agreement, and evidence to vary the terms of the note being incompetent.\n3. Bills and notes, \u00a7 431 \u2014when evidence of contemporaneous agreement inadmissible. The maker of a promissory note cannot defend against it by showing an oral contemporaneous agreement which makes the note payable on a contingency, for the reason that such evidence is incompetent as tending to vary the terms of a note absolute On its face.\n4. Bills and notes, \u00a7 327 \u2014when agreement to cancel invalid. An agreement by the payee named in a promissory note to cancel the note is invalid where it appears that such agreement was made after the making of the note, and where it does not appear that there was a consideration for such agreement.\n5. Bills and notes, \u00a7 90 \u2014when interest begins to run. The legal construction of a promissory note payable thirty days after date, \"with interest at the rate of 1% per annum, after -,\u201d is that such note draws interest from and after thirty days from its date.\n6. Contracts, \u00a7 238 \u2014when condition waived. In an agreement whereby plaintiff agreed to transfer to defendants a leasehold interest in and equipment of a theater, which agreement contained a clause providing that full performance should be made \u201cwhen the papers were drawn if found to conform\u201d to certain regulations \u201con or before thirty days\u201d after the date of the agreement, where defendants accepted a bill of sale of such property and took possession nine days after the date of such agreement, held that defendants waived the provision quoted by accepting such bill of sale and taking possession, and cannot complain that no more time was taken to ascertain whether such building was as provided in the agreement, although the provision quoted was ambiguous.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Lester E. Lee and Charles L. Swanson, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Miles J. Devine and John J. Devine, for defendants in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Gust F. Hesch, Plaintiff in Error, v. Charles J. Dennis and James Bakakos, Defendants in Error.\nGen. No. 20,372.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph S. La Buy, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1914.\nReversed with finding of fact.\nOpinion filed October 5, 1915.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Bills and notes, \u00a7 56 \u2014when expression of opinion not misrepresentation. In an action to recover on a promissory note, absolute on its face and given as part of the purchase price of the leasehold interest in and the equipment of a theater under an agreement providing that such theater building should \u201cconform with regulations of Building and Health Departments,\u201d where the affidavit of defense alleged that the building \u201cdid not conform to the city ordinances relating to ventilation; that plaintiff knew and fraudulently concealed the fact from defendants and induced them to sign the note by misrepresentation and fraud,\u201d held that the matter charged as misrepresentation amounted to no more than an expression of opinion as to a matter within the knowledge of both parties equally, or a matter as to which defendants were put on inquiry, it appearing that neither in the agreement nor in the bill of sale conveying plaintiff\u2019s leasehold interest did plaintiff vouch or warrant as' to the conformity of such building with such ordinances and regulations.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Gust F. Hesch, plaintiff, against Charles J. Dennis and James Bakakos, defendants, in the Municipal Court of Chicago, to recover on a promissory note made by defendants payable to the order of plaintiff, and given as part payment on a contract for the sale of a leasehold interest in and the equipment of a theater. To reverse a judgment for defendants, plaintiff prosecutes this writ of error.\nLester E. Lee and Charles L. Swanson, for plaintiff in error.\nMiles J. Devine and John J. Devine, for defendants in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0663-01",
  "first_page_order": 685,
  "last_page_order": 686
}