{
  "id": 5410300,
  "name": "John J. Gormley, Appellee, v. Anna Vydarena et al., trading as Lederer Brothers (Defendants). Rudolph Lederer and Samuel Lederer, Appellants",
  "name_abbreviation": "Gormley v. Vydarena",
  "decision_date": "1917-05-21",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,775",
  "first_page": "538",
  "last_page": "540",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "205 Ill. App. 538"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 229,
    "char_count": 3326,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.531,
    "sha256": "642defd2ae89065a40fe262a59a168b6a30aa6d8747996d877cd6e5dd58c3da2",
    "simhash": "1:403ae2a36c9e36fc",
    "word_count": 545
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:46:37.056812+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "John J. Gormley, Appellee, v. Anna Vydarena et al., trading as Lederer Brothers (Defendants). Rudolph Lederer and Samuel Lederer, Appellants."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Dever\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n5. Appeal and error, \u00a7 365 \u2014what is effect of failure to make objection and note exception at proper time. Failure to make objection and note exception at the proper time during the course of a trial, held to operate as a waiver of the right to present the merits of the controversy on appeal.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Dever"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Sabath, Stafford & Sabath, for appellants; Charles B. Stafford, of counsel.",
      "McMahon & Cheney, for appellee; Frank L. Cheney, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "John J. Gormley, Appellee, v. Anna Vydarena et al., trading as Lederer Brothers (Defendants). Rudolph Lederer and Samuel Lederer, Appellants.\nGen. No. 22,775.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Denis E. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 21, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nBill by John J. Gormley, complainant, against Anna Vydarena, Paul Vydarena, and Rudolph Lederer and Samuel Lederer, trading as Lederer Brothers, defendants, to apply property standing in the name of the defendant Samuel Lederer to the satisfaction of a judgment for $5,050 recovered by complainant against the defendant Anna Vydarena. From a decree ordering the defendants to pay to complainant $5,013, with interest, and costs within ten days or to surrender and deliver to a certain master in chancery of the court and transfer to said master all title, right and interest had or claimed by the defendant Samuel Lederer in and to a certain certificate of purchase to the property in question, defendants Eudolph Lederer and Samuel Lederer appeal.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Creditors\u2019 suit, \u00a7 56*\u2014when evidence is sufficient to show fraudulent procurement of loan and use of proceeds. Evidence held sufficient to show that certain of the defendants, the judgment debtor and her husband, obtained possession of complainant\u2019s money deliberately and by the use of grossest fraud, that they did not obtain a loan of money from the other defendants for the purpose of enabling them to get possession of the certificate of purchase of certain real estate in question, and that they in fact used complainant\u2019s money to-procure the certificate.\n2. Creditors\u2019 suit, \u00a7 56 \u2014when evidence is sufficient to show fraudulent assignment of certificate of purchase' of real estate. Evidence held sufficient to warrant the finding that the assignment of a certificate of purchase of certain real estate in question by the judgment debtor defendant to another defendant was done for the purpose of defrauding the debtor\u2019s creditors and in particular the complainant, and was without consideration in a creditor\u2019s bill on such judgment.\n3. Equity, \u00a7 313*\u2014what evidence is sufficient to overcome allegation of sworn answer. The allegations of defendants\u2019 sworn answer which, directly met the allegations of the bill, held overcome by the testimony of two witnesses or the equivalent thereof. 4. Equity, \u00a7 303*-\u2014who has burden of proof as to new matter alleged in answer. The burden of proof of new matter alleged in an answer to a bill, held to be upon the defendant.\nSabath, Stafford & Sabath, for appellants; Charles B. Stafford, of counsel.\nMcMahon & Cheney, for appellee; Frank L. Cheney, of counsel.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vola. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0538-01",
  "first_page_order": 566,
  "last_page_order": 568
}