{
  "id": 5405214,
  "name": "Jacob Bass, Defendant in Error, v. William T. Woodley, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Bass v. Woodley",
  "decision_date": "1917-05-01",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,106",
  "first_page": "469",
  "last_page": "470",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "205 Ill. App. 469"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 150,
    "char_count": 1942,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.593,
    "sha256": "144027f02e65203ac6e9fe4b10c91284b78e6946dfa702f7649ab1a7b33f42c8",
    "simhash": "1:c377d107b80d91bc",
    "word_count": 321
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:46:37.056812+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Jacob Bass, Defendant in Error, v. William T. Woodley, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McGoorty\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McGoorty"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Blum, Wolfsohn & Blum, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Darrow & Sissman, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Jacob Bass, Defendant in Error, v. William T. Woodley, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 22,106.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Edmunb K. Jabecki, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1917.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 1, 1917.\nRehearing denied May 14, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Jacob Bass, plaintiff, against William T. Woodley, defendant, to recover for rent on a written guaranty of a lease. From a judgment for plaintiff for nine hundred dollars, defendant brings error.\nBlum, Wolfsohn & Blum, for plaintiff in error.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Guaranty, \u00a7 7 \u2014when of lease is supported by consideration. In an action to recover for rent on a written guaranty (not under seal) of a lease, where it appeared that plaintiff purchased the premises from the defendant subject to existing leases, including the one in question, and it was contended by plaintiff that such purchase was conditioned upon a guaranty of the rents by the defendant and that such guaranty was agreed to prior to the execution of the contract of purchase, and it appeared that such guaranty was contained in the same instrument which assigned the lease in question and was delivered to plaintiff with the deed, and where the real question was whether there was a consideration for the guaranty, held that the execution and delivery of the said documents constituted one transaction and were supported by the same consideration.\n2. Deeds, \u00a7 196*\u2014when parol evidence is admissible to show consideration. While parol evidence is not admissible to vary or contradict the terms of a deed, yet such evidence may be introduced ' to show the true consideration recited in the deed.\nDarrow & Sissman, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section.number."
  },
  "file_name": "0469-01",
  "first_page_order": 497,
  "last_page_order": 498
}