{
  "id": 3023710,
  "name": "Isaac E. Glaseman, Appellee, v. Richard W. Farmer Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Glaseman v. Richard W. Farmer Co.",
  "decision_date": "1918-07-01",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 24,129",
  "first_page": "521",
  "last_page": "522",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "211 Ill. App. 521"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 157,
    "char_count": 1593,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.526,
    "sha256": "6b551a4f5f2d9367309a702d92837166b6a83ac6e2d0138951e14b45bea43061",
    "simhash": "1:517a24a798a79d5f",
    "word_count": 259
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:44:38.810297+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Isaac E. Glaseman, Appellee, v. Richard W. Farmer Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "M. L. Carmody, for appellant.",
      "Robert Edelson, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Isaac E. Glaseman, Appellee, v. Richard W. Farmer Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 24,129.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\n\u25a0Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh R. Stewart, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed July 1, 1918.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Isaac E. Glaseman, plaintiff, against Bichard W. Farmer Company, a corporation, defendant, to recover wages for services rendered while in defondant\u2019s employment. From a judgment for plaintiff for $35, defendant appeals.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Continuance, \u00a7 17 \u2014 when denial proper. Where the parties have been waiting all the morning for trial, a refusal to grant one of the parties a continuance of ten or fifteen minutes to bring his witnesses into court is proper.\n2. Master and servant, \u00a7 82*- \u2014 what evidence is inadmissible in action for services. In an action by an employee against a corporation to recover for services, where plaintiff\u2019s statement that he had been employed by a certain person as head of the corporation, that the latter had agreed to pay him the sum named per week and that he had actually been paid by checks drawn against defendant\u2019s account is uncontradicted, it is not error to exclude evidence of defendant\u2019s bookkeeper as to working arrangements between defendant and the establishment in which plaintiff worked.\nM. L. Carmody, for appellant.\nRobert Edelson, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same \u00bfopio and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0521-01",
  "first_page_order": 575,
  "last_page_order": 576
}