{
  "id": 5114820,
  "name": "McDonald v. Watson et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "McDonald v. Watson",
  "decision_date": "1894-01-11",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "203",
  "last_page": "203",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "51 Ill. App. 203"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 113,
    "char_count": 1249,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.487,
    "sha256": "1e24834d725dbc1d826e9016dedbaaf50627aef93f587ba18c575f341b595eb9",
    "simhash": "1:1751263e128f92ee",
    "word_count": 201
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:36:15.137575+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "McDonald v. Watson et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Waterman\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nThis was an action of assumpsit, the evidence in which unmistakably showed that the defendants thereto were in debted to appellees in the sum of $373.95, whereupon, the defendants offering no evidence, the court instructed the jury to return a verdict for $373.95.\nIt may be, as is urged by appellant, that immaterial and irrelevant testimony was admitted; but to the relevant and pertinent evidence establishing the plaintiff\u2019s claim, there was no reply, and the jury could not, with due regard to their oath, have rendered any other evidence.\nThe verdict and judgment are merely the conclusion of the law from the proven facts. The judgment is therefore affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Waterman"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Knight & Brown, attorneys for appellant.",
      "Hamlin, Holland & Boyden, attorneys for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "McDonald v. Watson et al.\n1. Verdict and Judgment\u2014Conclusion of Law, etc.\u20141The verdict and judgment are merely the conclusion of the law from the proven facts.\nMemorandum.\u2014Assumpsit. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Theodore Bkentano, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.\nOpinion filed January 11, 1894.\nThe statement of facts is contained in the opinion of the court.\nKnight & Brown, attorneys for appellant.\nHamlin, Holland & Boyden, attorneys for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0203-01",
  "first_page_order": 199,
  "last_page_order": 199
}