{
  "id": 2922965,
  "name": "Mary Schwarz, Appellee, v. Edgar S. Cooke, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Schwarz v. Cooke",
  "decision_date": "1917-10-02",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,098",
  "first_page": "310",
  "last_page": "311",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "207 Ill. App. 310"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 168,
    "char_count": 1968,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.604,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.565170110192638e-08,
      "percentile": 0.2860382979857127
    },
    "sha256": "450c57719de0287c68780b6650820c8e42eaf175dc85158e9eb79cd35a506183",
    "simhash": "1:4c4b062730eb01a9",
    "word_count": 335
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:52:34.192092+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Mary Schwarz, Appellee, v. Edgar S. Cooke, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n3. Accord and satisfaction \u2014 what does not constitute. The settlement of an account for rent between a real estate firm acting as agent and a member thereof cannot be availed of as an accord and satisfaction between the landlord and tenant, since the defense of an accord and satisfaction, to be available, must be between the parties to the action and none other.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Harris F. Williams, for appellant; W. Scott Hodges', of counsel.",
      "T. D. Hurley, for appellee.'"
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Mary Schwarz, Appellee, v. Edgar S. Cooke, Appellant.\nGen. No. 23,098.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Principal and agent, \u00a7 163 \u2014 when claim, for rent not defeated by unauthorized act of former agents. Where the authority of a real estate firm to collect rent for an apartment building, a part of which was occupied by a member of the firm, is revoked, the fact that the firm credits such partner with payment of rent due cannot defeat the claim of the landlord for rent.\n2. Judgment, \u00a7 519* \u2014 when of forcible entry and detainer res adjudicate as to rent due. A judgment in a forcible entry and detainer proceeding that the rent is due from a tenant and unpaid is res adjudicate on such question in a subsequent action for rent, in the absence of proof of payment of the rent subsequent to such judgment.\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Frank H. Graham, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1917.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed October 2, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nJudgment by confession by Mary Schwarz, plaintiff, against Edgar S. Cooke, defendant, under a warrant to confess judgment contained in a lease between the parties, \u2022 which judgment was afterwards opened and defendant permitted to plead to the merits. From a judgment for plaintiff for $74.25, defendant appeals.\nHarris F. Williams, for appellant; W. Scott Hodges', of counsel.\nT. D. Hurley, for appellee.'\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0310-01",
  "first_page_order": 336,
  "last_page_order": 337
}