{
  "id": 5404479,
  "name": "Emanuel F. Selz, Appellee, v. James W. Stafford, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Selz v. Stafford",
  "decision_date": "1917-05-21",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,871",
  "first_page": "558",
  "last_page": "559",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "205 Ill. App. 558"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 255,
    "char_count": 4106,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.579,
    "sha256": "0d5a63e59ee77cdb729a1bd21a13aa3485e71655f4915d2a13eedc7398c310b2",
    "simhash": "1:9b57dc86e0ec0ad8",
    "word_count": 704
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:46:37.056812+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Emanuel F. Selz, Appellee, v. James W. Stafford, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Holdom\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n3. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 13*\u2014what need not be attached to statement of claim in action for rent. In an action in the Municipal Court of Chicago to recover rent due under a lease, plaintiff is not required to attach a copy of the lease to his statement of claim or to offer it in evidence.\n4. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 8*\u2014when jurisdiction not affected by commencement of action as of fourth class. The fact that an action in the Municipal Court of Chicago was commenced as an action of the fourth class does not deprive that court of jurisdiction to enter judgment in excess of $1,000.\n5. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 28*\u2014when objection as to lack of jurisdiction is too late. An objection that the Municipal Court of Chicago is without jurisdiction to enter judgment in excess of $1,000, in an action commenced as an action of the fourth class, comes too late when first made on appeal.\n6. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 8 \u2014what constitutes conceding of jurisdiction by defendant in action of fourth class. \"Where defendant in an action of the fourth class in the Municipal Court of Chicago states in his affidavit of set-off and counterclaim that his damages exceed plaintiff\u2019s claim and also that his damages amount to $20,000, he concedes the jurisdiction of the court to enter a judgment in favor of either party in excess of $1,000.\n7. Landlord and tenant, \u00a7 297*\u2014when tenant not entitled to apportionment of rent. In an action to recover rent claimed to be due under a lease, where the amount claimed is admitted by defendant\u2019s default, defendant is not entitled to an apportionment of the rent hy reason of his having surrendered the premises before the expiration of the time for which rent is sought to be recovered.\n8. Landlord and tenant, \u00a7 311*\u2014when tenant may not offset against rent damages for interference with use of premises. A tenant who continues in the use and occupation of the premises cannot offset against the rent, damages claimed to have been caused him by reason of inconvenience in the use and occupation of the premises and hy reason of conduct of the landlord tending to interfere with their beneficial enjoyment.\n9. Set-off and recoupment, \u00a7 44*\u2014what is extent of right of set-off. Under Hurd\u2019s Rev. St. ch. 98, sec. 12 (J. & A. ji 7633), a set-off is limited to the amount of plaintiff\u2019s claim.\n10. Set-off and recoupment, \u00a7 10*\u2014what is not subject of. A claim for unliquidated damages can neither be set off nor recouped against a claim for liquidated damages.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Holdom"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "C. Van Alen Smith, for appellant.",
      "Mayer, Meyer, Austrian & Platt, for, appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Emanuel F. Selz, Appellee, v. James W. Stafford, Appellant.\nGen. No. 22,871.\n(Not to Tbe reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. \u201cAppeal and error, \u00a7 1170 ,\u2014when moot question not determined. In an action brought to recover rent and for forcible detainer where, before the trial, possession of the premises is surrendered, it is not proper that the court determine the moot question as to possession.\n2. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 13*\u2014what is effect of striking affidavit of defense and counterclaim and proceeding with trial. In an action of the fourth class where a defendant\u2019s affidavit of defense and counterclaim are stricken from the files and the cause proceeds to trial, defendant is in default and admits every material averment of plaintiff\u2019s claim.\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Jacob H. Hopkins, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 21, 1917.\nRehearing denied June 4, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction of the fourth class by Emanuel F. Selz, plaintiff, against James W. Stafford, defendant, in forcible detainer for the possession of certain premises and to recover rent alleged to be due. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff for $2,358.19, defendant appeals.\nC. Van Alen Smith, for appellant.\nMayer, Meyer, Austrian & Platt, for, appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.\nIllinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XT, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0558-01",
  "first_page_order": 586,
  "last_page_order": 587
}