{
  "id": 5144460,
  "name": "Oliver J. Wright v. Erastus E. Freeman",
  "name_abbreviation": "Wright v. Freeman",
  "decision_date": "1892-11-17",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "421",
  "last_page": "422",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "46 Ill. App. 421"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 159,
    "char_count": 1620,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.475,
    "sha256": "f6218d77620e76f11cb59a9915cf3f65dfecc993663c21bb63c7c896c97ba6e0",
    "simhash": "1:c83519b8b65d0419",
    "word_count": 275
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:44:05.291643+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Oliver J. Wright v. Erastus E. Freeman."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mb. Justice Watebman.\nThis was an action of assumpsit tried by a judge of the Superior Court without the intervention of a jury. Ho propositions of law were submitted, and the contention here is that the finding was not warranted by the evidence. \u2022\nWe see no sufficient reason for interfering with the conclusions of the court in this regard; nor do we think that the controversy was one as to which the parties should have been remitted to a court of chancery.\nAppellant insists that it is impossible to arrive from the evidence at the sum found by the court. We do not know upon what theory the court proceeded, but a fair statement of the evidence as to appellee\u2019s claim would seem to be:\nJ of 645 cars at 50 cents each............$161 25\nJ- of 75 cars at $4.00 each................ 150 00\nJ of extra work........................ 10 00\n$321 25\nDeduct one-half of $35 for extra help.-.............$17 50\nDeduct for board................................ 9 00\n$26 50\n$321 25\n26 50\n$294 75\nThe finding was' for $295.25. De minimis non etirat lex.\nThe judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mb. Justice Watebman."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Hiram H. Cody & Sons and Walpole Wood, for appellant.",
      "Mr. John C. Patterson, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Oliver J. Wright v. Erastus E. Freeman.\nContracts.\nIn a controversy arising out of a contract touching the unloading of stone from freight cars, this court, in view of the evidence, arrives at substantially the same judgment as the trial court and declines to interfere therewith.\n[Opinion filed November 17, 1892.]\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Jonas Hutchinson, Judge, presiding.\nMessrs. Hiram H. Cody & Sons and Walpole Wood, for appellant.\nMr. John C. Patterson, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0421-02",
  "first_page_order": 419,
  "last_page_order": 420
}