{
  "id": 5006591,
  "name": "Gustaf Nyquist v. George P. Martin",
  "name_abbreviation": "Nyquist v. Martin",
  "decision_date": "1890-05-28",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "623",
  "last_page": "623",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "35 Ill. App. 623"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 138,
    "char_count": 1559,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.585,
    "sha256": "6f9da88d80eda19af94949c7ed4e8c836fe7b680445fd19ad4598af59e8fc0ab",
    "simhash": "1:03cd8fb40cce457c",
    "word_count": 274
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:52:12.584336+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Gustaf Nyquist v. George P. Martin."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThis appeal is brought to review a judgment rendered in favor of appellee and against appellant for the sum of 860, for rent due under a lease. It is first contended that the lease was not delivered, and while there is some conflict of evidence on this point, an examination of the record convinces us that the evidence not only supports the finding of the court that the lease was delivered, but fully preponderates in favor of such conclusion.\nThe next contention is that because of a mistake in writing the lease, it is made to end April 30,1808, instead of 1888, and so there can be no recovery upon it. There is some ambiguity caused by the writing of the figure \u201c 8 \u201d instead of the word \u201c eighty \u201d before the word \u201c eight,\u201d but we are of opinion that no violence is done to the writing by reading it 1888.\nThe objection is the merest technicality, and is invoked to work an injustice. There is no merit in the appeal and the judgment must be affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. S. Whipple Gehe, for'appellant.",
      "Messrs. Bottom & Swartz, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Gustaf Nyquist v. George P. Martin.\nLandlord and Tenant\u2014Recovery of Rent\u2014Lease\u2014Ambiguity.\nIn an action brought for the recovery of rent, this court holds that the evidence justified the finding of the trial court that the lease involved was duly delivered, and that the error therein touching the year in which it was to end, can not affect the right of recovery thereon.\n[Opinion filed May 28, 1890.]\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. John P. Alto-eld, Judge, presiding.\nMr. S. Whipple Gehe, for'appellant.\nMessrs. Bottom & Swartz, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0623-01",
  "first_page_order": 619,
  "last_page_order": 619
}