{
  "id": 2919263,
  "name": "George W. Dingman, Appellee, v. Lawrence P. Boyle, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Dingman v. Boyle",
  "decision_date": "1918-01-28",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,490",
  "first_page": "311",
  "last_page": "312",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "209 Ill. App. 311"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 160,
    "char_count": 2475,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.531,
    "sha256": "302163836c3af0d024bdb0f1fb41e0d8c5c1e5e28607ddcdf7dfe4fab103ac28",
    "simhash": "1:e5fc7530cb0ca358",
    "word_count": 403
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:09:41.322311+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "George W. Dingman, Appellee, v. Lawrence P. Boyle, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Dever\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n3. Brokers, \u00a7 90 \u2014when evidence shows procurance of person willing to exchange property. Evidence held to sustain the finding that plaintiff, in an action to recover a commission on the sale and exchange of certain real estate, had procured a person ready, willing and able to exchange properties with defendant.\n4. Brokers, \u00a7 90*\u2014when shorn that plaintiff was ready to procure loan. . Evidence held to sustain the finding that plaintiff was ready, able and willing to procure a certain loan for defendant, required of plaintiff under a certain contract with defendant as precedent to plaintiff\u2019s right to a commission, in an action to recover a commission on the sale and exchange of certain real estate.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Dever"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Lambert & Mayer, for appellant.",
      "John M. Sweeney, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "George W. Dingman, Appellee, v. Lawrence P. Boyle, Appellant.\nGen. No. 23,490. (Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Brokers, \u00a7 88 \u2014when evidence shows insertion of provision for commission at date of contract. Evidence held to sustain the finding that a certain provision, inserted in the contract entered into by defendant for the sale and exchange of certain real estate, for the payment to plaintiff of a certain brokerage commission was inserted therein on the date of the execution of the contract, in an action to recover- the commission.\n2. Brokers, \u00a7 4*\u2014when person not having license may recover under special contract. Evidence held to sustain the finding that plaintiff was not engaged in the real estate brokerage business but to be entitled to receive compensation from defendant under a special contract, notwithstanding his failure to qualify as a licensed broker, In an action to recover a commission on the sale and exchange of certain real estate.\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Sheridan E. Fey, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the October term, 1917.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed January 28, 1918.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by George W. Dingman, plaintiff, against Lawrence P. Boyle, defendant, to recover $1,500 for services rendered to defendant in connection with a proposed sale and exchange of certain real estate. From a judgment for plaintiff for $1,500, defendant appeals.\nLambert & Mayer, for appellant.\nJohn M. Sweeney, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Yols. XI to XV, wtl Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vola. XI tQ Xy, and Cumulative Quarterly# same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0311-01",
  "first_page_order": 339,
  "last_page_order": 340
}