{
  "id": 2946865,
  "name": "Gustave A. Oehler, Plaintiff in Error, v. Charles Brand, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Oehler v. Brand",
  "decision_date": "1917-03-20",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,046",
  "first_page": "415",
  "last_page": "416",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "204 Ill. App. 415"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 147,
    "char_count": 1798,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.571,
    "sha256": "b8beb0c846ed2ee475235fe64ae5b590931faeb4f6435d48da0d7adcf59c2557",
    "simhash": "1:71155335d42d20fd",
    "word_count": 293
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:49:07.214052+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Gustave A. Oehler, Plaintiff in Error, v. Charles Brand, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McGoorty\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McGoorty"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Litzinger, McGurn & Reid, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Harry C. Levinson, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Gustave A. Oehler, Plaintiff in Error, v. Charles Brand, Defendant in Error.\nGen. No. 22,046.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Stelk, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed March 20, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction of replevin by Gustave A. Oehler, plaintiff, against Charles Brand, defendant, to recover certain chattels. From a judgment for defendant upon a directed verdict at the close of plaintiff\u2019s evidence, plaintiff brings error.\nDefendant executed to plaintiff a mortgage upon the goods sought to he replevied as security for payment of defendant\u2019s promissory note to plaintiff for three hundred and sixty dollars. The note and mortgage were placed in escrow with a certain party who was to deliver same to plaintiff when so directed by both plaintiff and defendant. He delivered same to plaintiff without defendant\u2019s knowledge, direction or consent.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Escrows, \u00a7 13 \u2014when delivery 'of note and mortgage held in escrow is ineffectual to pass title. Delivery of a note and chattel mortgage, held in escrow by a party, to the payee and grantee, contrary to the condition upon which such party held same, is ineffectual to pass title to such note and chattel mortgage to such payee and grantee.\n2. Escrows, \u00a7 7*\u2014when chattel mortgage held in escrow becomes operative. A chattel mortgage held in escrow cannot become operative until all the conditions of the escrow agreement are complied with.\nLitzinger, McGurn & Reid, for plaintiff in error.\nHarry C. Levinson, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0415-01",
  "first_page_order": 441,
  "last_page_order": 442
}