{
  "id": 2913452,
  "name": "Courtenay Barber, Defendant in Error, v. Mellish-Hayward Company, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Barber v. Mellish-Hayward Co.",
  "decision_date": "1918-01-28",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,468",
  "first_page": "299",
  "last_page": "300",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "209 Ill. App. 299"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 181,
    "char_count": 2342,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.52,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.8591662004228935e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3654572139147881
    },
    "sha256": "3e51054f2cf3a6239071c39a66fe02961fc4cea33980466d361d4d27c3bd559e",
    "simhash": "1:8dffcd057a8da188",
    "word_count": 379
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:09:41.322311+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Courtenay Barber, Defendant in Error, v. Mellish-Hayward Company, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n4. Appeal and erbob, \u00a7 864 \u2014when record not searched for information to reverse judgment. To reverse a judgment, the reviewing court will not go to the record for information which the plaintiff in error should have furnished in the' abstract.\n5. Appeal and erbob, \u00a7 1752*\u2014when judgment affirmed. A judgment will be affirmed where appellant fails to file a complete abstract or abridgment of the record as required by rule 18 of the Appellate Court, and the evidence, as ascertained from the statements in the briefs, is conflicting.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "George D. Wellington and Ernest W. Clark, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Henry T. Chace, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Courtenay Barber, Defendant in Error, v. Mellish-Hayward Company, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 23,468. (Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 866 \u2014requisites of abstract. An abstract must state enough, of the record to permit the errors assigned to be determined from the recitations of the abstract.\n2. Appeal and ebbob\u2014when evidence not reviewed. Errors assigned as to the admission and rejection of evidence cannot be reviewed where the abstract contains none of the pleadings.\n3. Pleading\u2014when affidavit of merits insufficient to take place of plea of non est factum. An affidavit of merits held insufficient to take the place of a plea of non est factum, which was the defense attempted to be made by the evidence, notwithstanding it challenged the sufficient execution of certain insurance policies referred to in certain written instruments to pay premiums thereon sued on.\nError to the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Charles H. Bowles, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the October term, 1917.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed January 28, 1918.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Courtenay Barber, plaintiff, against Mellish-Hayward Company, a corporation, defendant, to recover $478.65 on one and $727.20 on the other of two written promises of defendant to pay plaintiff certain insurance premiums, with interest. From a judgment for $1,431.03 for plaintiff, defendant brings error.\nGeorge D. Wellington and Ernest W. Clark, for plaintiff in error.\nHenry T. Chace, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0299-01",
  "first_page_order": 327,
  "last_page_order": 328
}