{
  "id": 2875588,
  "name": "Emma Freels, Appellee, v. Hugo Freels, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Freels v. Freels",
  "decision_date": "1915-10-06",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 20,848",
  "first_page": "119",
  "last_page": "120",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "195 Ill. App. 119"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 243,
    "char_count": 2889,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.508,
    "sha256": "8340bcd63420f798df351b83a32eac98e35bd1c6568c785d107bf5169c7e6368",
    "simhash": "1:e377e599dd4aecd7",
    "word_count": 498
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:42:01.145099+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Emma Freels, Appellee, v. Hugo Freels, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Fitch\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Fitch"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "T. F. Monahan, for appellant.",
      "No appearance for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Emma Freels, Appellee, v. Hugo Freels, Appellant.\nGen. No. 20,848.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. John P. McGoobty, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1914.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed October 6, 1915.\nStatement of the Case.\nSuit for divorce by Emma Freels against Hugo Freels. The bill charged the defendant with cruelty and adultery, and alleged that he was a man of large means, with an income of $10,000 or $12,000 a year. The defendant, by his sworn answer to the bill, denied that he was guilty of the charges made against him, and denied that he was possessed of as much property as was stated in the bill of complaint. His answer admitted ownership of real estate valued at $16,000, exclusive of the incumbrances thereon, however. The defendant also filed a cross-bill, accusing his wife of adultery, and it was evident from the allegations of the original bill, the answer thereto and the cross-bill, that there was a very bitter quarrel between the two. Upon a preliminary hearing as to the question of alimony pendente lite, the Circuit Court ordered the defendant to pay $6 a week until the further order of the court, and $25 solicitor\u2019s fees. The defendant failed to pay such allowance and a rule was entered to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt. At the hearing the defendant stated that he had four commissions for sales of real estate, aggregating $200, which would become due when the sales were consummated, but that he had no money and had borrowed $150 from his employer to meet expenses. Upon a second hearing, it appeared that one of the sales had been closed, but that his employer, instead of paying over defendant\u2019s share of the commission, had kept it to apply upon the loan above mentioned. The court evidently thought that these facts indicated an intention on the defendant\u2019s part to evade the order of the court, and again continued the hearing, with the statement that he must pay at least $25 on account of alimony, or he would be committed for contempt. When the next hearing came on, the defendant claimed that he had been unable to raise more than $10, which he offered to pay to the complainant. Thereupon the court adjudged him guilty of contempt of court and entered an order of commitment. This appeal followed.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nContempt, \u00a7 70 \u2014when order of commitment is proper. Evidence held, to justify an order of commitment for failure to pay alimony, it appearing that the defendant could have raised the small amount involved and that the chancellor was lenient when he failed to comply with the court\u2019s order.\nT. F. Monahan, for appellant.\nNo appearance for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0119-01",
  "first_page_order": 145,
  "last_page_order": 146
}