{
  "id": 5402225,
  "name": "D. T. Cahill, Appellee, v. J. J. Cahill, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Cahill v. Cahill",
  "decision_date": "1917-04-16",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,811",
  "first_page": "341",
  "last_page": "341",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "205 Ill. App. 341"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 126,
    "char_count": 1341,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.562,
    "sha256": "8b242bc78efe70a67f0e4b34fae87ea520d0e6cc6c70ea3312e76f8467658c86",
    "simhash": "1:02b54a04708f6970",
    "word_count": 227
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:46:37.056812+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "D. T. Cahill, Appellee, v. J. J. Cahill, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Holdom\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Holdom"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Otto G. Ryden, for appellant.",
      "George M. Weichelt, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "D. T. Cahill, Appellee, v. J. J. Cahill, Appellant.\nGen. No. 22,811.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Bills and notes, \u00a7 450*\u2014when evidence is sufficient to show demand of payment upon indorser. Evidence held sufficient to warrant finding that demand of payment of the note sued on was made upon defendant as indorser thereon, in an action to recover on said note.\n2. Bills and notes, \u00a7 272 \u2014when demand of payment upon indorser is necessary. Demand of payment of a note upon an indorser is necessary under the Negotiable Instruments Act.\n3. Bills and notes, \u00a7 287*\u2014when protest is unnecessary. No protest is necessary under the Negotiable Instruments Act of an inland bill.\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hosea W. Wells, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 16, 1917.\nRehearing denied April 30, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by D. T. Cahill, plaintiff, against J. J. Cahill, defendant, to recover on a promissory note for $750 indorsed by defendant. From a judgment for plaintiff for $581, defendant appeals.\nOtto G. Ryden, for appellant.\nGeorge M. Weichelt, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Yol\u00bb. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0341-01",
  "first_page_order": 369,
  "last_page_order": 369
}