{
  "id": 859908,
  "name": "Jacob Block et al. v. Max Rehfeld",
  "name_abbreviation": "Block v. Rehfeld",
  "decision_date": "1891-01-16",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "534",
  "last_page": "534",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "37 Ill. App. 534"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 103,
    "char_count": 1005,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.551,
    "sha256": "ddcff07b489892110d00fefba85d00d5e5063934ac0bccfeecad25db849bdf6a",
    "simhash": "1:464634b9f70d5243",
    "word_count": 178
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:53:41.478670+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Jacob Block et al. v. Max Rehfeld."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Waterman, J.\nThis action was begun before a justice of the peace; after trial and judgment there it was appealed to the Superior Court, and a trial de novo was heard; from the judgment of that court this appeal is prosecuted.\nThe case was one in which there was a dispute as to the facts\", and it is because it is insisted that the jury came to a wrong conclusion as to the facts, that we are asked to reverse the judgment below.\nWe are by no means sure that appellee should have had a finding in his favor, but we see no sufficient reason for overturning the verdict of the jury, and the judgment of the court is therefore affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Waterman, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Blum & Blum, for appellants.",
      "Mr. B. M. Shaffner, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Jacob Block et al. v. Max Rehfeld.\nPractice.\nThe evidence having been conflicting, this court declines to interfere with the verdict in the case presented.\n[Opinion filed January 16, 1891.]\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Elliott Anthony, Judge, presiding.\nMessrs. Blum & Blum, for appellants.\nMr. B. M. Shaffner, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0534-01",
  "first_page_order": 532,
  "last_page_order": 532
}