{
  "id": 2917370,
  "name": "Ernest De St. Aubin, Appellant, v. William G. King, Individually and as Trustee, et al., Morris Kurtzon, Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "De St. Aubin v. King",
  "decision_date": "1918-01-30",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,242",
  "first_page": "419",
  "last_page": "420",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "209 Ill. App. 419"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 240,
    "char_count": 3833,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.538,
    "sha256": "7bdc0c6d28fb69fb6c97ea05449cd624e5dcb450eef47dfd6fed3831c89bd2a0",
    "simhash": "1:4a2fe9a808ca9282",
    "word_count": 619
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:09:41.322311+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Ernest De St. Aubin, Appellant, v. William G. King, Individually and as Trustee, et al., Morris Kurtzon, Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Thomson\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Injunction, \u00a7 296*\u2014what damages awarded on dissolution of against foreclosure sale. Where the sale of property on foreclosure is enjoined, damages on the dissolution of the injunction should be computed according to the injury actually sustained, and consideration may be given to the proper amount .which might have been realized if the sale had not been enjoined, the value of money at the time and such other circumstances as tend to show the actual injury sustained.\n3. Injunction, \u00a7 381*-\u2014what need not he shown hy record on appeal from decree awarding damages on dissolution of. On appeal from a decree awarding damages on the dissolution of an injunction, it is not necessary that it appear from the record that the defendant paid or became liable to pay the amount allowed as solicitor\u2019s fees or that the amount allowed was the usual and customary charge for the services rendered. It is sufficient if it appear that the amount allowed was reasonable and fair, in view of the services rendered.\n4. Attorney and client, \u00a7 52*\u2014what constitutes prima facie showing of employment of attorney. Where the record on appeal from a decree awarding damages on the dissolution of a temporary injunction discloses that a certain attorney appeared for defendant, argued the motion to dissolve in his behalf and that the motion was granted, there is a prima facie showing that the attorney was employed by defendant.\n5. Attorney and client, \u00a7 52*\u2014when presumed attorney properly employed. Where there is prima facie proof that an attorney was employed by a party, defendant in proceedings for dissolution of temporary injunction, it will be presumed that he was properly employed until the contrary is shown.\n6. Injunction, \u00a7 321*\u2014solicitor\u2019s fees for procuring dissolution of temporary. An award of a solicitor\u2019s fee of $250 for services in procuring the dissolution of a temporary injunction, held reasonable and fair.\n7. Injunction, \u00a7 296*\u2014cost of advertising foreclosure sale as damages upon dissolution of. On awarding damages on the dissolution of a temporary injunction against a foreclosure sale, it is proper to include the cost of advertising the original sale.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Thomson"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Teller, Hart & Pennish, for appellant; Myer N. Rosengard, of counsel.",
      "Edmund W. Froehlich, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Ernest De St. Aubin, Appellant, v. William G. King, Individually and as Trustee, et al., Morris Kurtzon, Appellee.\nGen. No. 23,242. (Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Injunction, \u00a7 304 \u2014when interest allowed defendant for period which foreclosure sale delayed. Where damages are awarded defendant on the dissolution of a temporary injunction against a foreclosure sale, it is proper to allow interest to defendant, for the period the sale was delayed by the injunction, on money borrowed by him to use in buying an interest in the decree, even though the decree carried interest.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Frederick A. Smith, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1917.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed January 30, 1918.\nStatement of the Case.\nBill by Ernest De St. Aubin, complainant, against William Gr. King, individually and as trustee, Morris Kurtzon and Chicago Title & Trust Company, trustee, defendants, to enjoin a sale on foreclosure. A preliminary injunction procured by complainant was dissolved on motion of defendants, and, on suggestions of damages filed by defendant Kurtzon, a decree was entered in the latter\u2019s favor awarding him $471.90 damages against complainant, from which decree complainant appeals.\nTeller, Hart & Pennish, for appellant; Myer N. Rosengard, of counsel.\nEdmund W. Froehlich, for appellee.\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": "0419-01",
  "first_page_order": 447,
  "last_page_order": 448
}