{
  "id": 4988801,
  "name": "Jacob Conrad v. Bernard Kloepfer; August Trapp v. Same",
  "name_abbreviation": "Conrad v. Kloepfer",
  "decision_date": "1889-05-29",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "228",
  "last_page": "228",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "33 Ill. App. 228"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "66 Ill. 407",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2621047
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/66/0407-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "85 Ill. 476",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2777957
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/85/0476-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "45 Ill. 435",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        425016
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/45/0435-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 141,
    "char_count": 1498,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.496,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.15470708910056147
    },
    "sha256": "ce39694c15fb0622d534fd361b748207267881a922403918f04da7bcf153ce02",
    "simhash": "1:14d00f35443c647d",
    "word_count": 261
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:29:56.882977+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Jacob Conrad v. Bernard Kloepfer. August Trapp v. Same."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Garnett, P. J.\nOn simple issues of fact, the trial judge, to whom these cases were submitted without a jury, found adversely to appellants, who were plaintiffs below.\nBy a uniform rule, the finding of the court, upon evidence heard orally, as in this case, should have as much force as the verdict of a jury. Wood v. Price, 45 Ill. 435; Baker v. Rockabrand, 118 Ills. 370; Nimmo v. Kuykendall, 85 Ill. 476.\nOn the issue of fact, nothing more favorable to appellants can be said, than that the evidence is conflicting, which does not warrant this court in awarding a new trial.\nIt is clear that the evidence admitted over plaintiffs\u2019 objection had no influence in producing the findings of the court, and the rulings can not, therefore, be assigned as error. Thompson v. McLaughlin, 66 Ill. 407. The judgment in each case is affirmed. Judgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Garnett, P. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. Millard F. Higgle, for appellants.",
      "Messrs. John A. Murphey, Jr., and Lyman & Jackson, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Jacob Conrad v. Bernard Kloepfer. August Trapp v. Same.\nPractice\u2014Trial by the Court.\n1. The finding of the trial court upon evidence heard orally should have as much weight as the verdict of a jury.\n2. In such case the fact that the evidence was conflicting will not warrant this court in awarding a new trial.\n3. Error can not be assigned upon rulings which had no influence in producing the findings of the court.\n[Opinion filed May 29, 1889.]\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Rollin S. Williamson, Judge, presiding.\nMr. Millard F. Higgle, for appellants.\nMessrs. John A. Murphey, Jr., and Lyman & Jackson, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0228-01",
  "first_page_order": 226,
  "last_page_order": 226
}