{
  "id": 4984463,
  "name": "J. Obermann Brewing Company v. Caroline Ohlerking; Same v. Same",
  "name_abbreviation": "J. Obermann Brewing Co. v. Ohlerking",
  "decision_date": "1889-07-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "356",
  "last_page": "357",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "33 Ill. App. 356"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "33 Ill. App. 26",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        4987154
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/33/0026-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "68 Ill. 224",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2630052
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/68/0224-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 121,
    "char_count": 1260,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.552,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.138363859351185e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4711073888863791
    },
    "sha256": "dba8e8361ce621ad2ef81848befc373bd1afdfc1acfec471fafecd97adb31c45",
    "simhash": "1:434cf9bda84b4f1b",
    "word_count": 218
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:29:56.882977+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. Obermann Brewing Company v. Caroline Ohlerking. Same v. Same."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Garrett, P. J.\nThe questions in each of these cases are identical. Appellant claims that the judgment in each case should be reversed, because the trial court admitted the husband of appellee to testify as a witness in her behalf.\nSec. 5, Chap. 51, R. S., makes the husband a competent witness in cases where the litigation concerns the separate property of the wife. He is a competent witness although her title is not admitted. McNeil v. Zeigler, 68 Ill. 224.\nThese two suits are based on the same guaranty as that referred to in Obermann Brewing Co. v. Ohlerking, 33 Ill. App. 26, and the judgments are for other moneys due under such guaranty.\nAll other questions on these records are disposed of adversely to appellant by the opinion in that case.\nThe judgment in each case is aflarmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Garrett, P. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. B. M. Shaefheh, for appellant.",
      "Mr. William Munn, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. Obermann Brewing Company v. Caroline Ohlerking. Same v. Same.\nEvidence\u2014Testimony of Husband in Behalf of Wife\u2014Sec. 5, Chap. 51, B. S.\nIn the case presented, this court holds that the husband of the plaintiff was properly allowed to testify in her behalf.\n[Opinion filed July 2, 1889.]\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clieeord, Judge, presiding.\nMr. B. M. Shaefheh, for appellant.\nMr. William Munn, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0356-01",
  "first_page_order": 354,
  "last_page_order": 355
}