{
  "id": 2974451,
  "name": "National Bank of the Republic of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Arthur K. Hitomi et al., Plaintiffs in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "National Bank v. Hitomi",
  "decision_date": "1916-06-06",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,103",
  "first_page": "552",
  "last_page": "553",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "199 Ill. App. 552"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 132,
    "char_count": 1575,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.553,
    "sha256": "69f49e26ac08b747955dc50543bd9d6c3da2934514b03fc9ecb6ca65724cdd59",
    "simhash": "1:8d4909c5b0a93098",
    "word_count": 259
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:51:30.955611+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "National Bank of the Republic of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Arthur K. Hitomi et al., Plaintiffs in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Ernest Saunders, for plaintiffs in error.",
      "Newman, Poppenhusen & Stein, for defendant in. error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "National Bank of the Republic of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Arthur K. Hitomi et al., Plaintiffs in Error.\nGen. No. 22,103.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph P. Rafferty, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed June 6, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by the National Bank of the Republic of Chicago, plaintiff, against Arthur K. Hitomi and others, defendants. To reverse a judgment for plaintiff, defendants prosecute a writ of error.\nAn order was entered in this cause striking the bill of exceptions from the record. The plaintiff moved the court' to affirm the judgment on the ground that the assignm\u00e9nts of error and the brief and argument of the defendant touched only points appearing by the bill of exceptions, which the court found to be true. No errors were assigned or argued arising upon the statutory record.\nErnest Saunders, for plaintiffs in error.\nNewman, Poppenhusen & Stein, for defendant in. error.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nAppeal and erbob, \u00a7 1751 \u2014when judgment affirmed after striking. hill of exception from files. Where on review assignments of error touch points appearing only by a bill of exceptions, which has been stricken from the record, the judgment will be affirmed.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols, XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0552-01",
  "first_page_order": 574,
  "last_page_order": 575
}