{
  "id": 2946827,
  "name": "William P. MacCracken, Appellant, v. First National Bank of Wheaton et al., Appellees",
  "name_abbreviation": "MacCracken v. First National Bank",
  "decision_date": "1917-02-10",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 6,308",
  "first_page": "20",
  "last_page": "21",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "204 Ill. App. 20"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 198,
    "char_count": 2296,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.564,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.208007395086014e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4308206771900601
    },
    "sha256": "d9e0f5cc4d4151af0458128c827e0896c5a44af223b93bc7fc0c2fe2486b9f8a",
    "simhash": "1:dfe5ca319eb1b298",
    "word_count": 392
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:49:07.214052+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William P. MacCracken, Appellant, v. First National Bank of Wheaton et al., Appellees."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Niehaus\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1414 \u2014when finding of trial court will not be set aside. The finding of a trial court upon a controverted question of fact, where the evidence was conflicting, is entitled to the same consideration as the verdict of a jury would be under the same circumstances, and a court of review would not be warranted in setting aside such finding unless it is clearly against the weight of the evidence.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Niehaus"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Louis E. Hart, for appellant.",
      "John A. Russell, for appellees; Charles W. Hadley, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William P. MacCracken, Appellant, v. First National Bank of Wheaton et al., Appellees.\nGen. No. 6,308.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Replevin, \u00a7 14 \u2014what is prerequisite to maintenance of action of to recover bonds deposited by third person as collateral security for his own debt. Where a bank had obtained possession of and was holding certain bonds legally, as collateral security for a note held by the bank, which belonged to a third person who had loaned them to the maker of the note for the purpose of being so pledged, held that replevin for such bonds by the owner thereof would not lie without a legal tender of the amount due on the note.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Du Page county; the Hon. Clinton F. Irwin, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed February 10, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction of replevin by William P. MacCracken, plaintiff, against First National Bank of Wheaton, Alexander Metzel and M. E. Taylor, defendants, to recover possession \"of two bonds and of trover to recover for conversion thereof. From a judgment for defendants for costs, plaintiff appeals.\nThese bonds, for $1,000 and $500 respectively, were loaned by plaintiff to one C. B. Howard for the purpose of being pledged by him as collateral security for a note of $1,200 given by Howard to the defendant bank for money borrowed, and were so pledged. Howard shortly afterwards became bankrupt. The other defendants were officers of the bank.\nLouis E. Hart, for appellant.\nJohn A. Russell, for appellees; Charles W. Hadley, of counsel.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, game topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0020-01",
  "first_page_order": 46,
  "last_page_order": 47
}