{
  "id": 3016415,
  "name": "Robert Schrayer, trading as M. Schrayer's Sons & Company, Appellee, v. C. Doering & Son, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Schrayer v. C. Doering & Son",
  "decision_date": "1918-05-14",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,591",
  "first_page": "284",
  "last_page": "285",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "211 Ill. App. 284"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 150,
    "char_count": 1969,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.544,
    "sha256": "e23aba4727957715d6b7ae7e2b058532ccbfda0fe3ce9b650c8b216a705c1bd4",
    "simhash": "1:411d3a9ad7a883d9",
    "word_count": 314
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:44:38.810297+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Robert Schrayer, trading as M. Schrayer\u2019s Sons & Company, Appellee, v. C. Doering & Son, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McDonald\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Municipal Coubt of Chicago, \u00a7 13* \u2014 when error to strilce affidavit of defense from files. If an affidavit of defense sets forth a legal defense to any part of plaintiff\u2019s claim, it is error to strike the affidavit from the files.\n2. Municipal Coubt of Chicago, \u00a7 13* \u2014 when affidavit of defense is sufficient. In an action in the Municipal Court of Chicago to recover for goods, wares and merchandise under a written contract, an affidavit of defense states a good defense where it states that certain items in plaintiff\u2019s statement of claim were samples furnished gratis to defendant and that owing to an advance in price of the merchandise plaintiff failed to make delivery as agreed upon in the contract, and that by reason of the breach of the contract defendant was obliged to purchase merchandise elsewhere at an increased price; that by reason thereof defendant sustained damages in excess of plaintiff\u2019s claim for merchandise delivered, and that at the times when payment became due for merchandise delivered defendant offered to set off against the amounts due plaintiff damages due to plaintiff\u2019s nondelivery of merchandise.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McDonald"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Baker & Holder, for appellant.",
      "David Jetzinger, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Robert Schrayer, trading as M. Schrayer\u2019s Sons & Company, Appellee, v. C. Doering & Son, Appellant.\nGen. No. 23,591.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Wells M. Cook, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1917.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed May 14, 1918.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Robert Schrayer, trading as M. Schrayer\u2019s Sons & Company, plaintiff, against C. Doering & Son, a corporation, defendant, to recover for goods, wares and merchandise. Prom a judgment for $250.23 entered by default after defendant\u2019s affidavit of defense had been stricken from the files, defendant appeals.\nBaker & Holder, for appellant.\nDavid Jetzinger, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0284-01",
  "first_page_order": 338,
  "last_page_order": 339
}
