{
  "id": 5399398,
  "name": "Joe Baretti, Appellee, v. Peter S. Theurer, Trustee, and Peter Schoenhofen Brewing Company, Appellants",
  "name_abbreviation": "Baretti v. Theurer",
  "decision_date": "1917-04-13",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "164",
  "last_page": "166",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "206 Ill. App. 164"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 230,
    "char_count": 3028,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.577,
    "sha256": "d520e5d4e03550091d0e1c0b2c97920a01bc9025206ee23f6783a44cd65836b7",
    "simhash": "1:47ff8901d62f61ce",
    "word_count": 513
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:33:48.967362+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Joe Baretti, Appellee, v. Peter S. Theurer, Trustee, and Peter Schoenhofen Brewing Company, Appellants."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice McBride\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n5. Cancellation oe instruments\u2014when cancellation of bond and mortgage to secure sales to purchase is proper. Where complainant gave a certain bond to secure sales to be made by him in the future and did not specify any time or the extent of such sales, held that complainant would be entitled to have such bond and a mortgage given to secure same canceled when he should have paid all due if he did not desire to further continue business.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice McBride"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "\u25a0 Butz, Von Ammon & Johnston, for appellants; John E. Carr, of counsel.",
      "W. H. Hart and W. P. Seeber, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Joe Baretti, Appellee, v. Peter S. Theurer, Trustee, and Peter Schoenhofen Brewing Company, Appellants.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Franklin county; the Hon. ' Chabees H.\" Mieles, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the . October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 13, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nBill by. Joe Baretti, complainant, against Peter S. Theurer, trustee, and the Peter Schoenhofen Brewing Company, a corporation, defendants, to cancel a certain bond and mortgage\u2019 executed by the complainant, and cross-bill to foreclose such mortgage. From a decree canceling the bond and mortgage, defendants appeal.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Appeal and ebrob, \u00a7 1410 \u2014when finding deemed not to be against manifest weight of evidence. A finding that complainant\u2019s indebtedness, to secure which he had given the bond and mortgage in suit, had been fully paid, held not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the testimony as to the amount of the goods for which the indebtedness was incurred or the amount of payments thereon was confused and the facts were not so collated in the brief or abstract as to enable the court on review to pass on the question. ,\n2. Payment, \u00a7 29*\u2014when evidence sufficient to show payment of Chech. A finding that complainant had paid a certain check which had been, when presented, refused payment, held not error where subsequent payments for a much larger amount were shown to have been made.\n3. Witnesses, \u00a7 259*\u2014when testimony of agent of corporation is entitled to little weight. Testimony by an agent for the defendant corporation that the hooks of the corporation showed that complainant owed the corporation a certain balance, held not of much weight where the witness also testified he did not keep such hooks or receive the orders for the goods sold and had no personal knowledge of the transactions.\n4. Evidence, \u00a7 255*\u2014when ledger leaves are inadmissible to prove boohs of account. Certain ledger leaves offered in evidence not shown to he from a book of original entries, or that the entries made therein were made by the witness or were true and just, or were made by a deceased person or nonresident or in the usual course of business, held not admissible under the statute to prove hooks of\" account.\n\u25a0 Butz, Von Ammon & Johnston, for appellants; John E. Carr, of counsel.\nW. H. Hart and W. P. Seeber, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notos Digest, VoIs. XI to XV, arid Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0164-01",
  "first_page_order": 208,
  "last_page_order": 210
}