{
  "id": 5398652,
  "name": "Western Iron Company, v. John J. Brittain and Milton B. Bushnell, Plaintiffs in Error; In the Matter of the Petition of Joel C. Carlson to enforce Attorney's Lien, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Western Iron Co. v. Brittain",
  "decision_date": "1917-05-31",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,044",
  "first_page": "14",
  "last_page": "15",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "206 Ill. App. 14"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 166,
    "char_count": 2174,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.574,
    "sha256": "d93e99dfd73d37fac1645060cfd8e2a9aef06d074a3e855919580f8edbf258d0",
    "simhash": "1:4e3a9f7a400ff3a9",
    "word_count": 363
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:33:48.967362+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Western Iron Company, v. John J. Brittain and Milton B. Bushnell, Plaintiffs in Error. In the Matter of the Petition of Joel C. Carlson to enforce Attorney\u2019s Lien, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice O\u2019Connor\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 1193 \u2014what is effect of stipulation on questions reviewable. Where, on a hearing before the court, the parties expressly stipulate the questions to be decided, on a writ of error to reverse the judgment other questions are not properly before the Appellate Court.\n2. Coubts, \u00a7 69*\u2014when plea to jurisdiction is waived. A plea to the jurisdiction is waived by defendant by filing his answer and contesting the ease on the merits.\n3. Attorney and client\u2014what services are subject of attorney's lien. On a petition by plaintiff\u2019s attorney to enforce an attorney\u2019s lien against defendants, the amount which may be claimed is not limited to the fee for services rendered in obtaining the judgment, but may also include services rendered during the ninety-day period in which the execution was stayed by the filing of a stay bond by defendants, which services looked to the payment of the judgment.\n4. Attobney and client, \u00a7 127*\u2014when judgment for attorney's fees is not excessive. On a petition by plaintiff\u2019s attorney to enforce his attorney\u2019s lien against defendants, a judgment for petitioner for $175, held not excessive in view of the services rendered.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice O\u2019Connor"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Walter A. Lantz, for plaintiffs in error.",
      "Joel C. Carlson, pro se."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Western Iron Company, v. John J. Brittain and Milton B. Bushnell, Plaintiffs in Error. In the Matter of the Petition of Joel C. Carlson to enforce Attorney\u2019s Lien, Defendant in Error.\nGen. No. 22,044.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Habby Olson, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 31, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nPetition by Joel C. Carlson, to enforce his attorney\u2019s lien against John J. Brittain and Milton B. Bushnell, who were defendants in a suit against them by the Western Iron Company, a corporation. To reverse a judgment for petitioner for $175 against defendant Bushnell, this writ of error is prosecuted.\nWalter A. Lantz, for plaintiffs in error.\nJoel C. Carlson, pro se.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0014-01",
  "first_page_order": 58,
  "last_page_order": 59
}