{
  "id": 5410247,
  "name": "Edward Meisel, Defendant in Error, v. William Kalms, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Meisel v. Kalms",
  "decision_date": "1917-01-22",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,617",
  "first_page": "297",
  "last_page": "298",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "203 Ill. App. 297"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 146,
    "char_count": 1740,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.536,
    "sha256": "383afc04615764cdc0fd30ed6b94aa03baa6e1600846fafd5bc384bd6a48a9f0",
    "simhash": "1:054acedbb00f9af4",
    "word_count": 283
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:03:43.745976+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Edward Meisel, Defendant in Error, v. William Kalms, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Holdom\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Holdom"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Samuels & Samuels, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Emil A. Meyer, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Edward Meisel, Defendant in Error, v. William Kalms, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 22,617.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John A. Mahoney. Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed January 22, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Edward Meisel, plaintiff, against William Kalms, defendant, based upon an architect\u2019s certificate for $350 for balance due under a building contract between plaintiff, contractor and defendant, owner of the building upon which the work under the contract was done. From a judgment, upon trial before the court, for the plaintiff for the amount of the certificate, defendant brings error.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nBuilding and construction contracts, \u00a7 40 \u2014when owner mail not retain money under contract to pay liens. Where a building contract provided that the owner might retain out of any money due the contractor an amount sufficient to indemnify him against any lien or claim chargeable to the contractor for which, if established, the owner might be liable, and there was a subcontractor\u2019s lien filed but no\" suit was brought thereon, held in an action by the contractor against the owner for the balance due under the contract brought more than four months after the time final payment was due the subcontractor, and wifhin which period a petition to enforce such lien should have been filed, that the subcontractor\u2019s lien filed constituted no defense to such action.\nSamuels & Samuels, for plaintiff in error.\nEmil A. Meyer, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vola. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0297-01",
  "first_page_order": 321,
  "last_page_order": 322
}