{
  "id": 5405688,
  "name": "Harry B. Lusch, Appellant, v. Charles J. Rittenhouse and Walter Rittenhouse, Executors, Appellees",
  "name_abbreviation": "Lusch v. Rittenhouse",
  "decision_date": "1917-04-16",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,757",
  "first_page": "320",
  "last_page": "320",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "205 Ill. App. 320"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 124,
    "char_count": 1486,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.553,
    "sha256": "5406782a7996368ef2797a4343c2f84c91f83b86ac825cbc85b1295e3da8d469",
    "simhash": "1:99b1573ec00745bd",
    "word_count": 239
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:46:37.056812+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Harry B. Lusch, Appellant, v. Charles J. Rittenhouse and Walter Rittenhouse, Executors, Appellees."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Dever\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Dever"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Frederick W. Snider, for appellant.",
      "Bulkley, More & Tallmadge, for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Harry B. Lusch, Appellant, v. Charles J. Rittenhouse and Walter Rittenhouse, Executors, Appellees.\nGen. No. 22,757.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\nInjunction\u2014when contract by surety on bond relating to appeal includes review by writ of error. Where the surety upon an injunction bond agreed by a certain contract upon consideration of the filing of suggestion of damages on dissolution of the injunction instead of commencing an action on the injunction bond that he \u2022would abide by \"the final determination of said suggestion of damages by said Superior Court, or upon' final determination of any appeal that may be taken from any award that may be rendered * * * by said Superior Court,\u201d held that the word \u201cappeal\u201d as so used embraced a writ of error by means of which a final determination of the suggestion of damages or award was reached.\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. William N. Gemmill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 16, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Harry B. Lusch, plaintiff, against Charles J. Rittenhouse and Walter Rittenhouse, executors of the estate of Moses F. Rittenhouse, deceased, defendants, to recover upon a certain contract by letter signed by the decedent. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals.\nFrederick W. Snider, for appellant.\nBulkley, More & Tallmadge, for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0320-01",
  "first_page_order": 348,
  "last_page_order": 348
}