{
  "id": 5412106,
  "name": "Morris Chainowitz, Appellant, v. Stanley Formanek, Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "Chainowitz v. Formanek",
  "decision_date": "1916-12-19",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 21,891",
  "first_page": "267",
  "last_page": "268",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "202 Ill. App. 267"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 98,
    "char_count": 1030,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.55,
    "sha256": "065cdeda853b86e534362064046526e1847152e64068ea99f63d3b53f3ed4ff7",
    "simhash": "1:9d1cd222413630dc",
    "word_count": 162
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:59:19.228114+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Morris Chainowitz, Appellant, v. Stanley Formanek, Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Saltier & Rossen, for appellant.",
      "John J. Moser, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Morris Chainowitz, Appellant, v. Stanley Formanek, Appellee.\nGen. No. 21,891.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Stelk, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1915.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed December 19, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction in replevin by Morris Chainowitz, plaintiff, against Stanley Formanek, defendant. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.\nSaltier & Rossen, for appellant.\nJohn J. Moser, for appellee.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nReplevin, \u00a7 17*\u2014when action will not lie. In an action of replevin where the plaintiff based his claim on an alleged sale of the goods in question by the defendant through the agency of the lat-tor\u2019s wife, and the evidence showed that the defendant repudiated the alleged arrangements, never received the purchase price and never parted with possession of the goods, held that a judgment for the defendant was proper."
  },
  "file_name": "0267-01",
  "first_page_order": 293,
  "last_page_order": 294
}