{
  "id": 2972995,
  "name": "Antonio Parisi, trading as A. Parisi & Company, Defendant in Error, v. Conrad Heegn, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Parisi v. Heegn",
  "decision_date": "1916-04-28",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 21,500",
  "first_page": "320",
  "last_page": "321",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "199 Ill. App. 320"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 183,
    "char_count": 2259,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.529,
    "sha256": "1ebe13edf4cd008dc678389652e6c2c6d457e8111eb55aad3c4f52ff42852ceb",
    "simhash": "1:67616c1f3b8fb0fd",
    "word_count": 370
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:51:30.955611+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Antonio Parisi, trading as A. Parisi & Company, Defendant in Error, v. Conrad Heegn, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Albert Schaffner, for plaintiff in error.",
      "George E. Dawson, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Antonio Parisi, trading as A. Parisi & Company, Defendant in Error, v. Conrad Heegn, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 21,500.\n(Not to toe reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Abitold Heap, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1915.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed April 28, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Antonio Parisi, trading as A. Parisi & Company, plaintiff, against Conrad Heegn, defendant. To reverse a judgment for plaintiff, defendant prosecutes this writ of error.\nIt appeared from the statement of claim, in substance, that plaintiff was a real estate broker and at defendant\u2019s request procured a purchaser for certain real estate belonging to defendant, to whom defendant sold the property for $9,600, and that there was due and owing plaintiff $250 as a commission for the sale, according to rates fixed by the Chicago Beal Estate Board.\nIssue wa,s taken in defendant\u2019s affidavit of merits only on the question of the procuring cause of the sale, defendant alleging that plaintiff was not, but another broker was, the procuring cause thereof, and the trial resulted in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $237.50.\nPlaintiff\u2019s own undisputed evidence disclosed that there was no such contract as the implied contract sued on, but that there was an express contract that defendant would sell at a price to net him $9,500 and that plaintiff should get his commission or compensation from the purchaser. The defendant also made the same kind of arrangement with the other broker through whom the deal was closed at the price of $9,600 after plaintiff had been negotiating with the same purchaser at the price of $9,750. .The purchaser testified that he saved $150 in buying through the other broker.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nBrokers, \u00a7 Z% -when evidence insufficient to support verdict. In an action by a broker to recover commissions on the sale of real estate, evidence examined and held insufficient to support the verdict\nAlbert Schaffner, for plaintiff in error.\nGeorge E. Dawson, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vole. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0320-01",
  "first_page_order": 342,
  "last_page_order": 343
}