{
  "id": 5020891,
  "name": "Carl Schwarze v. Herman Roessler",
  "name_abbreviation": "Schwarze v. Roessler",
  "decision_date": "1891-05-05",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "474",
  "last_page": "476",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "40 Ill. App. 474"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "28 Wis. 563",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Wis.",
      "case_ids": [
        8708821
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/wis/28/0563-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "4 Gray, 292",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Gray",
      "case_ids": [
        2075555
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/mass/70/0292-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "23 N. J. L. 457",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.J.L.",
      "case_ids": [
        401181
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/njl/23/0457-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "3 Scam. 120",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Scam.",
      "case_ids": [
        2471943
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/4/0120-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "77 Ill. 18",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        821816
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/77/0018-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 245,
    "char_count": 2868,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.548,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.6447166401910215e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6916756536771063
    },
    "sha256": "b9979ef728f1c1ca548bb8e831e04e7fa236ae5c6c6e0672bb6749735cdc13d4",
    "simhash": "1:f12ecd2fc4df8540",
    "word_count": 517
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:55:04.940945+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Carl Schwarze v. Herman Roessler."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Gary, J.\nThe appellee is the surviving partner of the firm of Roessler & Winckler, mason contractors.\nIn the spring of 1888, they were, building some houses for the appellant, of which Henry Sierks was the architect. The appellant gave to the architect a request or order, as follows:\n\u201c Chicago, March 2, 1888.\nMessrs. Roessler & Winckler:\nGentlemen: Please pay to the order of Henry Sierks, Esq., the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars, and charge the same to my account with you.\nCarl Schwarze.\u201d\nThe firm gave Sierks the money, and the present suit is by the appellee against the appellant in assumpsit to recover that $250.\nThe only question in the case is, whether the appellant paid it to Winckler in his lifetime. The competent evidence upon that subject does not make the fact so clear that this court may assume that it was or was not paid. To prove that it had not been paid, the appellee, over the objection and exception of the appellant, put in evidence a firm account book, in form a ledger, but in fact their only book, and one of original entries, kept by Winckler, in which the $250 was charged with no corresponding credit. To justify that, the appellee relies upon Sec. 3, Chap. 51, R. S., admitting in evidence an \u201caccount book\u201d under certain circumstances, where \u201cthe claim or defense is founded on a book account.\u201d\nThat statute prescribes the preliminary proof upon which the book is to be admitted, but does not at all change the old law as to the character of the book that may be admitted, or of the items or charges that may be proved by it.\nSeveral cases in this State are cited in Kibbe v. Bancroft, 77 Ill. 18. The old law was that cash items could not be proved by such books. Boyer v. Sweet, 3 Scam. 120; Insley v. Prall, 23 N. J. L. 457, a very elaborate case.\nMuch less can the absence of entries in such a book be evidence that payments testified to by witnesses were not made. A false entry would be an act of wrong; an omission to enter, might be mere negligence or forgetfulness, with no motive good or bad.\nAccount books were held to be no evidence of a negative in Morse v. Potter, 4 Gray, 292, and Winner v. Bauman, 28 Wis. 563.\nThe admission of the hook was error, and the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.\nReversed and remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Gary, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Kraus, Mayer & Stein, for appellant",
      "Mr. Edmund Furthmann, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Carl Schwarze v. Herman Roessler.\nPractice\u2014Evidence\u2014Account Books\u2014Sec. 3, Chap. 51, R. S.\n1. The absence of entries in an account book will not warrant the assumption that payments testified to by witnesses were not made to the person who kept it, and whose business transactions were recorded therein.\n2. Such book will not be received as evidence of a negative or to prove cash items.\n[Opinion filed May 5, 1891.]\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. R. W. Clifford, Judge, presiding.\nMessrs. Kraus, Mayer & Stein, for appellant\nMr. Edmund Furthmann, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0474-01",
  "first_page_order": 470,
  "last_page_order": 472
}
