{
  "id": 3016680,
  "name": "Stresenreuter Brothers, Appellee, v. Henry A. Knott, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Stresenreuter Bros. v. Knott",
  "decision_date": "1918-07-10",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,590",
  "first_page": "556",
  "last_page": "557",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "211 Ill. App. 556"
    }
  ],
  "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": 1998,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.536,
    "sha256": "9ca4f4063800e896ff1ad249d784606ed1f5cb4b4897d0c1e10547d36f671502",
    "simhash": "1:361d4ea1520878dc",
    "word_count": 326
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:44:38.810297+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Stresenreuter Brothers, Appellee, v. Henry A. Knott, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Taylor\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Taylor"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "A. M. Cross, for appellant.",
      "C. W. Greenfield, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Stresenreuter Brothers, Appellee, v. Henry A. Knott, Appellant.\nGen. No. 23,590.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Building and construction contracts, \u00a7 103 - \u2014 when evidence supports verdict on note given in payment for work. In an action to recover on a promissory note given in payment for work performed under a building contract, evidence examined and held sufficient to support a judgment for plaintiff.\n2. Building and construction contracts, \u00a7 97* \u2014 when evidence is admissible to show that departure from terms was sanctioned. Where, by their conduct, the parties to a building contract waive a provision therein that authority to depart from its terms shall be in writing, in an action to recover on a note given in payment for work done under the contract, evidence offered by plaintiff to show that the departure from the terms was with the sanction of defendant\u2019s proper representative is admissible.\n3. Building and construction contracts, \u00a7 83* \u2014 what is not condition precedent to suit by contractor on note. Where a promissory note is given in payment of work done under a building contract, it is not necessary that the question of the damages, which the maker of the note claims to have suffered by reason of a deviation from the plans, be referred to the architect for determination before the contractor can bring suit on the note.\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph S. LaBuy, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1917.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed July 10, 1918.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Stresenreuter Brothers, a corporation, plaintiff, against Henry A. Knott, defendant, to recover on a promissory note. From a judgment for plaintiff for $1,996.91, defendant appeals.\nA. M. Cross, for appellant.\nC. W. Greenfield, for appellee.\nSee Hllnois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0556-01",
  "first_page_order": 610,
  "last_page_order": 611
}