{
  "id": 2963699,
  "name": "William F. Kurtz, Appellee, v. John Evans, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Kurtz v. Evans",
  "decision_date": "1916-04-21",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "180",
  "last_page": "181",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "201 Ill. App. 180"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 147,
    "char_count": 1760,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.563,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.809691169799156e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4967667999176786
    },
    "sha256": "942a0f403a2bd8a7ea2c320c69928726f849c0a5bb61903f0461e0dcc2ebb5df",
    "simhash": "1:8876a08d120d969d",
    "word_count": 289
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:52:04.845486+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William F. Kurtz, Appellee, v. John Evans, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Brokers, \u00a7 37 \u2014when broker not procuring cause of sale. Where, in an action for commissions for the sale of the defendant\u2019s farm, there was no contradiction of the purchaser\u2019s testimony that he, when told by the plaintiff that the defendant\u2019s farm was for sale, knew it was for sale and so stated to the plaintiff, and uncontradicted evidence showed that the plaintiff did nothing further in connection with the sale, held that the plaintiff was not the efficient or procuring cause of the sale and not entitled to commissions.\n2. Evidence, \u00a7 222*\u2014when evidence inadmissible as hearsay. In an action for real estate commissions, testimony of the plaintiff that the defendant\u2019s son stated, out of the presence of the defendant, that the defendant would treat the plaintiff right in the matter of paying him commission, held improperly admitted.\n3. Trial, \u00a7 133*\u2014when remarks of counsel to jury improper. In an action for breach of contract, a remark to the jury by counsel for the plaintiff that the defendant was a business man, successful and rich, held improper and vicious.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Herrick & Herrick, for appellant.",
      "Edward J. Sweeney, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William F. Kurtz, Appellee, v. John Evans, Appellant.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\nAppeal from the County Court of DeWitt county; the Hon. Frederick C. Hill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1915.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed April 21, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by William F. Kurtz, plaintiff, against John Evans, defendant. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.\nHerrick & Herrick, for appellant.\nEdward J. Sweeney, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0180-01",
  "first_page_order": 222,
  "last_page_order": 223
}