{
  "id": 5409616,
  "name": "Hodges Fiber Carpet Company, Defendant in Error, v. Hugro Manufacturing Company, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hodges Fiber Carpet Co. v. Hugro Manufacturing Co.",
  "decision_date": "1917-02-09",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 21,109",
  "first_page": "404",
  "last_page": "405",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "203 Ill. App. 404"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 158,
    "char_count": 1648,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.578,
    "sha256": "4dc20909fde32e5213843af084ad77c66f69f0281e6b1a87777a4e0390294bb4",
    "simhash": "1:c337d80175af82cf",
    "word_count": 268
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:03:43.745976+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Hodges Fiber Carpet Company, Defendant in Error, v. Hugro Manufacturing Company, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Depositions, \u00a7 34 \u2014when will not be suppressed because of defect in notary\u2019s certificate. The failure of a notary\u2019s certificate to depositions taken before him subsequent to the time set for taking same to show an adjournment is a mere irregularity which is not sufficient to warrant suppression of the depositions in the absence of evidence tending to show injury or surprise of one of the parties thereby.\n2. Depositions, \u00a7 35 -\u2014when motion to suppress is too late. Where depositions were returned promptly and notice of their taking given to the opposite party\u2019s attorney six months prior to trial, held that it was his duty to ascertain whether such depositions had been returned and to present a motion to suppress them before the case was called for trial, and it was then too late.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "William D. Johnson, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Herman S. Waldman, for defendant in error; Morris K. Levinson, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Hodges Fiber Carpet Company, Defendant in Error, v. Hugro Manufacturing Company, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 21,109.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of .Chicago; the Hon. Edward T. Wade, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed February 9, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Hodges Fiber Carpet Company, a corporation, plaintiff, against the Hugro Manufacturing Company, a corporation, defendant. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.\nWilliam D. Johnson, for plaintiff in error.\nHerman S. Waldman, for defendant in error; Morris K. Levinson, of counsel.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Yols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0404-01",
  "first_page_order": 428,
  "last_page_order": 429
}