{
  "id": 5401003,
  "name": "Marian S. Lindem, Defendant in Error, v. Katharina Sauerland, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Lindem v. Sauerland",
  "decision_date": "1917-05-31",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,072",
  "first_page": "15",
  "last_page": "16",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "206 Ill. App. 15"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 127,
    "char_count": 1351,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.545,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.770845263994211e-08,
      "percentile": 0.41196919202625326
    },
    "sha256": "abd157681d34059bc9a0d065a45b257ceae1d83093512d74bfab9c7ecaf018be",
    "simhash": "1:4f6bdd15d80b62b8",
    "word_count": 222
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:33:48.967362+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Marian S. Lindem, Defendant in Error, v. Katharina Sauerland, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice O\u2019Connor\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice O\u2019Connor"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Zach Hofheimer and Arthur Clements, for plaintiff in error.",
      "P. E. O\u2019Neil, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Marian S. Lindem, Defendant in Error, v. Katharina Sauerland, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 22,072.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John R. Cavebly, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 31, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Marian S. Lindem, plaintiff, against Katharina Sauerland, defendant, to recover money alleged to be due. To reverse a judgment for plaintiff for $425.18, defendant prosecutes this writ of error.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Attorney and client, \u00a7 10 \u2014when evidence shows attorney to he acting in interests of third person. Evidence held to show that in giving to defendant a receipt in full of plaintiff\u2019s claim the attorney hy whom such receipt was given was not acting in the interests of plaintiff hut of defendant, and that plaintiff was not bound thereby.\n2. Attorney and client, \u00a7 10*\u2014right to represent adverse litigants. Attorneys at law cannot accept employment from adverse litigants at the same time and in the same controversy.\nZach Hofheimer and Arthur Clements, for plaintiff in error.\nP. E. O\u2019Neil, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0015-01",
  "first_page_order": 59,
  "last_page_order": 60
}