{
  "id": 5411204,
  "name": "Dora M. Riggin, Appellee, v. Martin Keck, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Riggin v. Keck",
  "decision_date": "1916-11-13",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "87",
  "last_page": "89",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "203 Ill. App. 87"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 245,
    "char_count": 3299,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.522,
    "sha256": "174834734a30b97a8605f3df98cc79551a6e664c56ac4103bdb47f6d0f7ca81e",
    "simhash": "1:c273c810391f37b3",
    "word_count": 570
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:03:43.745976+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Dora M. Riggin, Appellee, v. Martin Keck, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Boggs\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n7. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 1546 \u2014when giving of instruction assuming facts is harmless error. An instruction which assumes a fact is erroneous, hut where such instruction does not direct a verdict, and the error is not serious when the instruction is considered with other instructions, and the facts assumed arise only incidentally, the giving of such instruction is not reversible error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Boggs"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "J. L. Simpson, for appellant.",
      "Geers & Geers, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Dora M. Riggin, Appellee, v. Martin Keck, Appellant.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\nAppeal from the County Court of Madison county; the Hon. H. B. Eaton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed November 13, 1916.\nBehearing denied and opinion modified and refiled January 13, 1917.\nCertiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Dora M. Biggin, plaintiff, against Martin Keck, defendant, to try the right to property taken by defendant under an attachment. From a judgment in' favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Acknowledgment, \u00a7 34 \u2014what does not constitute fatal omission in by justice of the peace. The omission of the words \u201cand entered by me\u201d made by a justice of the peace in his certificate of acknowledgment to a bill of sale does not render such hill of sale void as to third parties.\n2. Acknowledgment, \u00a7 44 \u2014when presumed that proper entry of certificate of is entered in record of justice of the peace. It will he presumed, on appeal, in absence of evidence to the contrary, that an entry of a certificate of acknowledgment to a bill of sale was entered by a justice of the peace in his records.\n3. Fraudulent conveyances, \u00a7 89 \u2014when bill of sale by husband to wife is valid. Where a husband is indebted to bis wife, at the time he executes a hill of sale to her of certain personal property, and said bill of sale is made upon a sufficient consideration and is a fair transaction, it is valid and binding notwithstanding he may he at the time indebted to other parties.\n4. Fraudulent conveyances, \u00a7 284 \u2014when good faith in making transfer is question for jury. The question whether a husband\u2019s conveyance to his wife of certain personal property is for a bona fide debt to her and made in good faith and not in fraud of the rights of creditors is one of fact for the jury,' and their finding should not be disturbed unless against the manifest weight of the evidence.\n5. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1562 \u2014when refusal of abstract instruction is harmless error. The refusal of an instruction which is abstract in form though correct in announcing the principle of law is discretionary with the court and is not reversible error, particularly if such instruction is long and involved and would tend to confuse rather than enlighten the jury.\n6. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1525 \u2014when defective instructions are not reversibly erroneous. Instructions are to be taken as a whole, and if when so taken the jury could not have been misled by the failure of some of the instructions to require the jury to find from a preponderance of the evidence, such failure is not reversible error.\nJ. L. Simpson, for appellant.\nGeers & Geers, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vola. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0087-01",
  "first_page_order": 111,
  "last_page_order": 113
}