{
  "id": 5405929,
  "name": "Eli R. Wagler and Noah Wagler, trading as Wagler Brothers, Appellants, v. James A. Norris, Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "Wagler v. Norris",
  "decision_date": "1917-04-16",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "69",
  "last_page": "70",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "205 Ill. App. 69"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 166,
    "char_count": 2385,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.57,
    "sha256": "d28ed033ab003a50762cb1de4f2814d9e1fdd3c3b67997c442a8b2c67073a48b",
    "simhash": "1:872030a7cc09f4c0",
    "word_count": 387
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:46:37.056812+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Eli R. Wagler and Noah Wagler, trading as Wagler Brothers, Appellants, v. James A. Norris, Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Graves\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n3. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1565 \u2014when modification of instruction not prejudicial error. In an action to recover commissions claimed on a sale of real estate, modification of an instruction offered by plaintiffs by adding the words \u201cand sale\u201d after the word \u201cpurchaser\u201d in the clause \u201cand that their services were instrumental in securing a purchaser and sale,\u201d held to be insignificant and not prejudicial.\n4. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1526*\u2014when instructions not reversibly erroneous. Instructions, even if wrong, held not reversibly erroneous where the verdict and judgment thoroughly comported with the manifest justice of the case.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Graves"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Wilkins & Brecher, for appellants.",
      "William A. Potts, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Eli R. Wagler and Noah Wagler, trading as Wagler Brothers, Appellants, v. James A. Norris, Appellee.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Bbokbbs, \u00a7 88 \u2014when evidence sufficient to sustain verdict \u25a0for defendant in action for commissions. Evidence held sufficient to sustain a verdict for the defendant, in an action to recover commissions claimed on a sale of defendant\u2019s real estate.\n2. Tbial, \u00a7 78*\u2014when evidence is not proper in rebuttal. In an action to recover commissions claimed on a sale of real estate, where one of the plaintiffs testified in chief to a certain conversation between him and defendant, and the defendant testified that he had not met the witness at the time and place testified to by the latter, the testimony of another witness offered by the plaintiffs in rebuttal that he saw the former witness and defendant at said time and place, held to be competent in chief but properly excluded in rebuttal.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Tazewell county; the Hon. John M. Niehaus, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 16, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Eli R. Wagler and Noah Wagler, trading as Wagler Brothers, plaintiffs, against James A. Norris, defendant, to recover commissions claimed to have been earned by the plaintiffs for selling certain real estate for defendant. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiffs appeal.\nWilkins & Brecher, for appellants.\nWilliam A. Potts, for appellee.\nSee Hlinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vole. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0069-01",
  "first_page_order": 97,
  "last_page_order": 98
}