{
  "id": 5101126,
  "name": "Fred Miller Brewing Company v. Robert Beckington",
  "name_abbreviation": "Fred Miller Brewing Co. v. Beckington",
  "decision_date": "1894-06-04",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "191",
  "last_page": "192",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "54 Ill. App. 191"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "44 Ill. App. 526",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5068307
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/44/0526-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "54 Ill. App. 146",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 194,
    "char_count": 2695,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.492,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.317852702137001e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4370579134150292
    },
    "sha256": "b914fbdb868ddfcc6faa8f61f64da4ad5751c3b15b2c4a0a2dfb8d3ab6038bae",
    "simhash": "1:d48b3947f0d03204",
    "word_count": 441
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:49:51.601388+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Fred Miller Brewing Company v. Robert Beckington."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Waterman\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nThe hill of exceptions in this case is so defective that we are unable to say what the entire proceedings upon the trial of the cause were, and consequently can not determine whether any of the errors alleged to have been committed during said trial are well assigned.\nThe bill of exceptions shows that one Gr. F. Lampey, being called as a witness by the plaintiff, was sworn, and \u201c testified as follows: \u201d\n\u201c Direct examination conducted by Mr. Whittlesey.\u201d\nHere follows a chattel mortgage, after which is the question, \u201c What is your name % A. G. F. Lampey.\u201d\nFurther along is the following:\n\u201cThe chattel mortgage identified by the witness was offered in evidence by counsel for plaintiff, admitted, marked plaintiff\u2019s exhibit A, and is as follows (here insert chattel mortgage),\u201d but no chattel mortgage is there inserted.\nWhat follows the direction \u201chere insert chattel mortgage,\u201d is, \u201c counsel for plaintiff then and there offered in evidence,\u201d here is inserted a judgment note; following it are these words: \u201c Acknowledgment on the back of the mortgage admitted, marked plaintiff\u2019s exhibit B, and is as follows : (Here insert acknowledgment.)\u201d \u201c And also the entry of the indorsement of the recorder admitted, marked plaintiff\u2019s exhibit 0, and is as follows: (Here insert indorsement.)\u201d \u201cAnd also the note identified by the witness, admitted, marked plaintiff\u2019s exhibit D, and is as follows: (Here insert note.)\u201d\nQ. \u201c Mr. Lampey, you may examine this other chattel mortgage and this note.\nThe Court: Another one %\nMr. Whittlesey: Yes, sir.\u201d\nThe foregoing illustrates the way in which, as to numerous exhibits, the bill of exceptions is made up. . \u2022\nA bill of exceptions is a pleading, taken most strongly against him who offers it; inferences favorable to such party are not to be drawn from it; uncertainties in it are resolved against him. Roy v. Galloway, Post; Page v. Northwestern Brewing Co., 54 Ill. App. 146; Spangenberg v. Charles, 44 Ill. App. 526.\nThe judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Waterman"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Elisha Whittlesey, Jr., attorney for appellant.",
      "Robert Beckington, pro se."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Fred Miller Brewing Company v. Robert Beckington.\n1. Bill of Exceptions\u2014To Be Taken Most Strongly Against the Person Offering It.\u2014A bill of exceptions is a pleading, to be taken most strongly against him who offers it. Inferences favorable to such party are not to be drawn from it, and uncertainties in it are resolved against him.\nMemorandum.\u2014Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Thomas Gr. Windes, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the March term, 1894,\nand affirmed.\nOpinion filed June 4, 1894.\nThe opinion states the case.\nElisha Whittlesey, Jr., attorney for appellant.\nRobert Beckington, pro se."
  },
  "file_name": "0191-01",
  "first_page_order": 189,
  "last_page_order": 190
}