{
  "id": 5142976,
  "name": "Jan Kriz, Impleaded, etc. v. Rad Pokrok, No. 65 C. S. P. S.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Kriz v. Rad Pokrok, No. 65 C. S. P. S.",
  "decision_date": "1892-11-17",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "418",
  "last_page": "419",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "46 Ill. App. 418"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "124 Ill. 317",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2928914
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/124/0317-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "54 Ill. 349",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5274965
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/54/0349-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "64 Ill. 360",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5306788
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/64/0360-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "46 Ill. 46",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5298202
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/46/0046-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "43 Ill. 309",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5266501
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/43/0309-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "44 Ill. App. 510",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5067131
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/44/0510-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "40 Ill. App. 462",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5025400
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/40/0462-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "119 Ill. 352",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2901901
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/119/0352-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "19 Ill. App. 549",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        4905561
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/19/0549-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 185,
    "char_count": 2020,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.512,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.087085966315723e-08,
      "percentile": 0.37858153120123994
    },
    "sha256": "64e94362b570d56dd355ba944c3ae09c76fd8ebe5957cefa50d5989c8c2485a0",
    "simhash": "1:1ecc7fd5b3a437a8",
    "word_count": 343
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:44:05.291643+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Jan Kriz, Impleaded, etc. v Rad Pokrok, No. 65 C. S. P. S."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gary.\nJudgment by confession was entered upon a note wrongly described in the declaration as dated in 1892, instead of 1890. The court below permitted the . date to be corrected. There was no error in that. Carpenter v. First Nat. Bank, 19 Ill. App. 549; 119 Ill. 352.\nAll other grounds for disturbing the judgment are based upon affidavits stating that the plaintiff (appellee) \u201c stated \u201d or \u201c agreed \u201d as alleged in the affidavits. Such affidavits are of no value. The reasons are fully set forth in Schultz v. Plankinton Bank, 40 Ill. App. 462. The appellee\u2019s name can hardly be that of an individual, and therefore it must be presumed to be the name of a corporation. Clark v. \u00c6tna Iron Works, 44 Ill. App. 510. But if the affidavits were considered, no defense is shown.\nThe legal effect of the note can not be varied by conversations before its execution. Harris v. Galbraith, 43 Ill. 309; Miller v. Wells, 46 Ill. 46; Beattie v. Browne, 64 Ill. 360; Mason v. Burton, 54 Ill. 349.\nAn agreement, without consideration, to give time to the principal, is no defense for the surety. Brandt on Surety-ship and Guaranty, Sec. 342; Price v. Dime Savings Bank, 124 Ill. 317.\nThe judgment is affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gary."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Fanning & Herdlicka, for appellants.",
      "Messrs. Cross & Jindrich, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Jan Kriz, Impleaded, etc. v Rad Pokrok, No. 65 C. S. P. S.\nNegotiable Instruments\u2014Principal and Surety.\n1. The legal effect of a note can not be varied by conversations before its execution. v\n2. An agreement without consideration, to give time to the principal, is no defense for the surety.\n3. A court may permit the date of a note to be corrected in a declaration, judgment by confession having been obtained upon the note wrongly described, it being sought to set aside the same.\n4. An affidavit setting- forth that a corporation \u201c stated \u201d or \u201c agreed \u201d ' is valueless.\n[Opinion filed November 17, 1892.]\n' Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding.\nMessrs. Fanning & Herdlicka, for appellants.\nMessrs. Cross & Jindrich, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0418-01",
  "first_page_order": 416,
  "last_page_order": 417
}