{
  "id": 5412691,
  "name": "David Braverman, Defendant in Error, v. Morris Bordacov, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Braverman v. Bordacov",
  "decision_date": "1916-12-13",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 21,467",
  "first_page": "196",
  "last_page": "197",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "202 Ill. App. 196"
    }
  ],
  "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": 1916,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.55,
    "sha256": "9d9f7e88a09d046b6ed53cc20958e8c56e0f1ee0968025160079e6c069ff3a21",
    "simhash": "1:0d61a004700e58dd",
    "word_count": 311
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:59:19.228114+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "David Braverman, Defendant in Error, v. Morris Bordacov, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Taylor\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Assumpsit, Action of, \u00a7 89 \u2014vihen evidence shows contract for worlc, labor and materials. In an action for work, labor and materials alleged to have been furnished the defendant by the plaintiff, in which the defendant denied that he had contracted therefor with the plaintiff, evidence held to justify a judgment for the plaintiff.\n2. Assumpsit, Action of, \u00a7 88*\u2014when memoranda of worlc done under contract admissible. In an action by a contractor for labor, work and materials furnished the defendant, held that the plaintiff\u2019s \u201cjob tickets,\u201d consisting of copies made by the plaintiff after the completion of the work from memoranda made by him on slips of paper as the work was being done, were admissible in evidence, the slips having been destroyed, on the ground that the original memoranda were not available and that the \u201cjob tickets\u201d were his books.\n3. Judgment, \u00a7 247*\u2014when entry after remittitur proper. The action of a trial court in setting aside a judgment for the plaintiff and, after a remittitur had been made, entering judgment for the amount remaining, held unobjectionable.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Taylor"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Blum & Blum, for plaintiff in error.",
      "H. J. Finder, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "David Braverman, Defendant in Error, v. Morris Bordacov, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 21,467.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Charles A. Williams, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1915.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed December 13, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by David Braverman, plaintiff, against Morris Bordacov, defendant, for work, labor and materials furnished the defendant by the plaintiff. To review a judgment for plaintiff, defendant prosecutes a writ of error.\nBlum & Blum, for plaintiff in error.\nH. J. Finder, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0196-01",
  "first_page_order": 222,
  "last_page_order": 223
}