{
  "id": 2914665,
  "name": "United States Fashion & Sample Book Company, Appellant, v. W. D. Schmidt, trading as W. D. Schmidt & Company, Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "United States Fashion & Sample Book Co. v. Schmidt",
  "decision_date": "1917-12-21",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,925",
  "first_page": "240",
  "last_page": "241",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "209 Ill. App. 240"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 204,
    "char_count": 2749,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.53,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.380125665320789e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3928956861963767
    },
    "sha256": "3c7eca83b8ebc3eee2d6d53d5a16d1007ccbe7f07c03a93ee5c86ef3c009c8bb",
    "simhash": "1:894f6dacd4ad38cc",
    "word_count": 451
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:09:41.322311+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "United States Fashion & Sample Book Company, Appellant, v. W. D. Schmidt, trading as W. D. Schmidt & Company, Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Matchett\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Matchett"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Hoyne, O\u2019Connor & Irwin, for appellant.",
      "D. K. Cochrane, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "United States Fashion & Sample Book Company, Appellant, v. W. D. Schmidt, trading as W. D. Schmidt & Company, Appellee.\nGen. No. 22,925. (Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Frank H. Graham, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1916.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed December 21, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction \"by United States Fashion & Sample Book Company, a corporation, plaintiff, against W. D. Schmidt, trading as W. D. Schmidt & Company, defendant, to recover $686.75, on account for goods, wares and merchandise. From a judgment for defendant on a directed verdict, plaintiff appeals.\nDefendant filed claim of set-off for credits and damages of $484.20\" \u201cdue the defendant less the sum of $686.75 as sued for by plaintiff \u2019 \u2019; also, after trial was begun, an affidavit setting up that plaintiff was a corporation for profit organized under the laws of the State of Pennsylvania, etc., and that it was and had been doing business in the State of Illinois, although never authorized to do so, and by reason of the statute approved May 18, 1905, could not maintain its action, on which ground verdict was directed.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Municipal Court op Chicago, \u00a7 13 \u2014when statement of claim is sufficient. A statement of claim demanding a certain sum claimed to be due plaintiff on account for goods, wares and merchandise, held to state a good cause of action.\n2. Sales, \u00a7 325*\u2014what constitutes a prima facie case in action for goods sold. In an action for goods sold to defendant, a claim of set-off for a certain sum \u201cless\u201d the amount as sued for, held, to be an admission by pleading making a prima facie case for plaintiff, and casting on defendant burden of proving set-off.\n3. Cobpobatxons, \u00a7 709*\u2014when foreign corporation is doing business within State. Plaintiff, a foreign corporation, was doing business within the State, where it maintained an office in the State in charge of its vice president, and orders were taken and accepted within the State on samples for shipments of the corporation\u2019s goods from the place of manufacture without the State to the customer within the State. '\n4. Commerce, \u00a7 4*\u2014what constitutes interstate. Where a foreign corporation made contracts within the State contemplating the manufacture of its goods without the State, and their shipment from the place of manufacture to the customer within the State, held that the transaction would constitute interstate commerce.\nHoyne, O\u2019Connor & Irwin, for appellant.\nD. K. Cochrane, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0240-01",
  "first_page_order": 268,
  "last_page_order": 269
}