{
  "id": 2946597,
  "name": "J. W. Hoodwin Company, Appellee, v. A. E. Pinkerton, et al. On appeal of A. E. Pinkerton and R. R. Pinkerton, Appellants",
  "name_abbreviation": "J. W. Hoodwin Co. v. Pinkerton",
  "decision_date": "1917-03-12",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,713",
  "first_page": "298",
  "last_page": "299",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "204 Ill. App. 298"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 138,
    "char_count": 1718,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.529,
    "sha256": "c5f664e2a1a305bfa7829c00ca716840d61f8270eecfd47f164b6043c0950615",
    "simhash": "1:be9b61a4562a855c",
    "word_count": 290
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:49:07.214052+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. W. Hoodwin Company, Appellee, v. A. E. Pinkerton, et al. On appeal of A. E. Pinkerton and R. R. Pinkerton, Appellants."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nPartnership, \u00a7 52*\u2014when evidence is insufficient to show. Evidence held insufficient to show that certain defendants, appellants, were connected in any way, as partners or otherwise, with a certain detective agency, to an agent of which plaintiff paid a certain sum of money, in an action to recover such money.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "George H. Mason, for appellants.",
      "No appearance for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. W. Hoodwin Company, Appellee, v. A. E. Pinkerton, et al. On appeal of A. E. Pinkerton and R. R. Pinkerton, Appellants.\nGen. No. 22,713.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John A. Mahoney, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed March 12, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by the J. W. Hoodwin Company, a corporation, plaintiff, ag\u2019ainst A. E. Pinkerton, R. R. Pinkerton and J. W. Rankin, defendants, to recover fifty dollars paid by plaintiff to a party claimed to have been an ag\u2019ent of the defendants. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants A. E. Pinkerton and R. R. Pinkerton appeal.\nThe action was brought against these defendants and Matt W. Pinkerton, upon whose death the action was discontinued as to him. Plaintiff claimed it was induced to pay the sum of fifty dollars to Henry E. Failer upon his representation that he was agent for Pinkerton & Company, U. S. Detective Agency, and that said agency was the same company as the Pinkerton National Detective Agency. Matt W. Pinkerton of the former agency was the husband of A. E. Pinkerton and father of R. R. Pinkerton, and used their names on the letterhead of his agency.\nGeorge H. Mason, for appellants.\nNo appearance for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0298-01",
  "first_page_order": 324,
  "last_page_order": 325
}