{
  "id": 2916673,
  "name": "Mendel Sachs, Appellee, v. Friedman Brothers & Lipsky Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Sachs v. Friedman Bros. & Lipsky Co.",
  "decision_date": "1918-01-31",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,108",
  "first_page": "427",
  "last_page": "428",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "209 Ill. App. 427"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 164,
    "char_count": 1845,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.545,
    "sha256": "3cc71baa1e14d9e05c70b0f6a7094b7c11bd64a97d44908a2a40d52775f4b4c8",
    "simhash": "1:e36d5b005225c052",
    "word_count": 305
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:09:41.322311+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Mendel Sachs, Appellee, v. Friedman Brothers & Lipsky Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n3. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1165*\u2014when contention not reviewed. The Appellate Court will not review a contention which is not made an issue by the pleadings and upon which it is not disclosed by the abstract that the court was called to rule by instructions or otherwise.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mancha Bruggemeyer, for appellant.",
      "Jacob Levy and Josiah Burnham, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Mendel Sachs, Appellee, v. Friedman Brothers & Lipsky Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 23,108. (Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Corporations, \u00a7 322 \u2014when sale to corporation through officer shown. In an action to recover the purchase price of goods sold and delivered, evidence held to support a finding that the goods were purchased by one of defendant\u2019s officers for defendant and not for himself individually, though he gave his personal check in payment.\n2. Interest, \u00a7 18*\u2014when account deemed liquidated. In an action to recover for the purchase price of goods where it is found that a check for the exact amount of the price was given by defendant immediately after the delivery, it is to be inferred that th\u00e9 purchase price was due at the time of the sale and 'was, therefore, a liquidated account bearing interest from the date of the sale.\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Frank H. Graham, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1917.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed January 31, 1918.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Mendel Sachs, plaintiff, against Friedman Brothers & Lip sky Company, a corporation, defendant, to recover the purchase price of goods and merchandise claimed to have been sold defendant. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.\nMancha Bruggemeyer, for appellant.\nJacob Levy and Josiah Burnham, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0427-01",
  "first_page_order": 455,
  "last_page_order": 456
}