{
  "id": 3045899,
  "name": "Great Western Hat Works, Appellee, v. Pride Hat Company and Samuel Katz, on appeal of Samuel Katz, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Great Western Hat Works v. Pride Hat Co.",
  "decision_date": "1922-01-23",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 26,892",
  "first_page": "249",
  "last_page": "251",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "224 Ill. App. 249"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "238 Ill. 232",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3426911
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/238/0232-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "197 Ill. App. 622",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5378342
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/197/0622-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "170 Ill. 498",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3182913
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/170/0498-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "70 Ill. App. 627",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5253832
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/70/0627-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "166 Ill. App. 172",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8499554
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/166/0172-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "73 Ill. App. 486",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5238840
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/73/0486-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "63 Ill. App. 211",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5168725
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/63/0211-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "131 Ill. 273",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5417649
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/131/0273-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "86 Ill. 185",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2773345
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/86/0185-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "11 Ill. 622",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2577284
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/11/0622-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 250,
    "char_count": 3880,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.518,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.539260474718606e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4476699220688156
    },
    "sha256": "c76856cac707b1bb55310b6f4dd452d3a57f2cfdb3340f4ebb67403217724a00",
    "simhash": "1:6b2f24aea5e9bf44",
    "word_count": 667
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:42:04.180465+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Great Western Hat Works, Appellee, v. Pride Hat Company and Samuel Katz, on appeal of Samuel Katz, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Matchett\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nPlaintiff below caused a confession of judgment to be entered against defendant appellant in the sum of $1,431.85, with an allowance of $150 attorneys\u2019 fees, upon six promissory notes. \u2018 All these notes were dated May 2,1919, payable to the order of the plaintiff, with power to confess judgment. The notes were signed, \u201cPride Hat Co. by Samuel Katz, president,\u201d and underneath this signature appeared the further signature, \u201cSamuel Katz.\u201d\nThe judgment against defendant appellant was entered September 8, 1920, and the notes were not, by the terms thereof, due at that time. The defendant, Samuel Katz, made a motion to open up and vacate the judgment, which motion was denied, and from that order this appeal is taken. In support of the motion the affidavit of Samuel Katz was submitted. It set forth that none of the notes upon which judgment was entered was due and payable at the time of the entry of judgment and the respective dates upon which the notes would become due; that the notes were executed upon consideration of merchandise sold and delivered to the Pride Hat Company; that Samuel Katz signed said notes as a maker at the request of the plaintiff, for the purpose of guaranteeing payment of said notes \u25a0 by the Pride Hat Company, and as surety for the said Pride Hat Company; that he was not indebted to the plaintiff in any sum of money personally, but merely executed them as a comaker with the Pride Hat Company, for the purpose of guaranteeing payment of said notes; all of which facts plaintiff had full knowledge of at the time of the execution of said notes.\nThe affidavit did not deny that the amount named in the notes as an indebtedness was in fact owing.\nThe power of attorney on each of these notes authorized irrevocably any attorney of any court of record to appear for \u201cus in such court in term time or vacation, at any time hereafter, and confess a judgment without process, etc. \u2019 \u2019 Under such a power judgment may be confessed before the maturity of the note. Sherman v. Baddely, 11 Ill. 622; Adam v. Arnold, 86 Ill. 185; McDonald v. Chisholm, 131 Ill. 273; Blanck v. Medley, 63 Ill. App. 211; Shepherd v. Wood, 73 Ill. App. 486; Allport v. Meutsch, 166 Ill. App. 172.\nAn affidavit of this sort is strictly construed against the pleader. The notes plainly showed an unconditional promise on the part of both makers to pay and parol proof could not be received to vary these terms. Travelers\u2019 Ins. Co. v. Mayo, 70 Ill. App. 627, affirmed 170 Ill. 498; Johnson v. Hennessey, 197 Ill. App. 622; Moyses v. Schendorf, 238 Ill. 232.\nThe judgment is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nDever, P. J., and McSurely, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Matchett"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Schoenbrod & Kosengard, for appellant.",
      "Louis J. Delson, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Great Western Hat Works, Appellee, v. Pride Hat Company and Samuel Katz, on appeal of Samuel Katz, Appellant.\nGen. No. 26,892.\n1. Bills and notes\u2014when judgment may be confessed before maturity of notes. Under a power of attorney contained in promissory notes authorizing any attorney of any court of record to appear for \u201cus in such court in term time or vacation, at any time hereafter,' and confess a judgment without process,\u201d judgment may be confessed before the maturity of the notes.\n2. Judgment\u2014h\u00f3w affidavit in support of motion to open up judgment by confession construed. An affidavit in support of a motion to open up and vacate a judgment by confession under a \u00a3ower of attorney is strictly construed against the pleader.\n3. Evidence\u2014when parol evidence not admissible. Where promissory notes plainly showed an unconditional promise on the part of both makers to pay, parol proof could not be received to vary their terms.\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Charles A. Williams, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1921.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed January 23, 1922.\nSchoenbrod & Kosengard, for appellant.\nLouis J. Delson, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0249-01",
  "first_page_order": 283,
  "last_page_order": 285
}