{
  "id": 5397209,
  "name": "Lindsey Corbly, Defendant in Error, v. Lida Corbly and Fred M. Corbly. Lida Corbly, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Corbly v. Corbly",
  "decision_date": "1917-04-16",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "527",
  "last_page": "528",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "206 Ill. App. 527"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 239,
    "char_count": 3473,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.566,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.207966869300525e-08,
      "percentile": 0.32752469352460317
    },
    "sha256": "c1a0769e4d662f7d4a68319b297b807286d5e67a50542535ed257c173152eb05",
    "simhash": "1:021019cddb0d245d",
    "word_count": 606
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:33:48.967362+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Lindsey Corbly, Defendant in Error, v. Lida Corbly and Fred M. Corbly. Lida Corbly, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Graves\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Continuance, \u00a7 31*\u2014discretion of court. A motion for a continuance on the ground of ill health of a party defendant is addressed solely to the discretion of the trial judge.\n3. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 1350*\u2014when exercise of discretionary power by court is not error. The exercise of a discretionary power by a court is never error unless it is clearly abused.\n4. Continuance, \u00a7 49*\u2014when affidavit for is insufficient. An affidavit for a continuance because of the ill health of one of two party defendants, showing that the instrument sued on is a forgery and that no one can testify as to - such fact except such defendant, is insufficient where the plea of defendant is not verified, as under section 52 of the Practice Act (J. & A. f 8589), providing that no person shall be permitted to deny the execution of an instrument in writing sued on unless he shall verify his plea by affidavit, such party would not have been allowed to testify that the instrument was a forgery if she had been in court.\n5. Landlobd and tenant, \u00a7 473*\u2014when no notice to quit or demand for rent is necessary. Where a tenant claims title adverse to his landlord, no notice to quit or demand for rent is necessary before bringing suit to dispossess him.\n6. Landlobd and tenant, \u00a7 474*\u2014when notice or demand for rent is sufficient. Where notice of the landlord\u2019s election to terminate the tenancy for nonpayment of rent and for immediate possession is given, no other notice or demand for rent is necessary before beginning an action of forcible entry and detainer.\n7. Tbial, \u00a7 198 \u2014when direction of verdict for plaintiff is proper. There is no error in instructing a jury in a forcible entry and detainer action to find the issues for plaintiff where all the essential elements necessary to plaintiff\u2019s right of recovery are proven and uncontroverted.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Graves"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Kerr & Lindley and Schneider & Schneider, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Dobbins & Dobbins, Acton & Acton and Oscar H. Wylie, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Lindsey Corbly, Defendant in Error, v. Lida Corbly and Fred M. Corbly. Lida Corbly, Plaintiff in Error.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Continuance, \u00a7 21 \u2014when motion for on ground of ill health of defendant is properly denied. A motion for continuance based on the ground that the health of one of two defendants was such as to render it inadvisable for her to attend the trial as a witness is properly denied within the discretion of the court, where there is no sufficient showing as to when her health is likely to be such as to warrant her in appearing in court, or of any diligence in securing her deposition between the date when the case was first continued and the date to which it was then continued, or of any reason why the same was not taken, or of why it would not have been satisfactory.\nError to the County Court\" of Ford county; the Hon. John H. G-illan, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 16, 1917.\nRehearing denied July 2, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction of forcible entry and detainer by Lindsey Corbly, plaintiff, against Lida Corbly and Fred M. Corbly, defendants. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant Lida Corbly brings error.\nKerr & Lindley and Schneider & Schneider, for plaintiff in error.\nDobbins & Dobbins, Acton & Acton and Oscar H. Wylie, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section nvmber.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0527-01",
  "first_page_order": 571,
  "last_page_order": 572
}