{
  "id": 5103342,
  "name": "Chicago Stamping Company v. Solomon L. Bignall, Edmond B. Bigelow and Claude Bigelow, Impleaded with Charles J. Glenn",
  "name_abbreviation": "Chicago Stamping Co. v. Bignall",
  "decision_date": "1894-06-18",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "312",
  "last_page": "313",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "54 Ill. App. 312"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "129 Ill. 298",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2962751
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/129/0298-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "30 Ill. App. 98",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2422874
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/30/0098-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "46 Ill. App. 430",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5143234
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/46/0430-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "147 Ill. 520",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        833785
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/147/0520-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "59 Ill. 184",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5234244
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/59/0184-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 214,
    "char_count": 2785,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.508,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.15535770618287012
    },
    "sha256": "45714fc2074c682f0c54064c961b6d2f3ef1b707486f8e6715d35f4329522611",
    "simhash": "1:30e056ebb85e8a9c",
    "word_count": 467
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:49:51.601388+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Chicago Stamping Company v. Solomon L. Bignall, Edmond B. Bigelow and Claude Bigelow, Impleaded with Charles J. Glenn."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nThe declaration began thus: \u201c The Chicago Stamping Company, a corporation, etc., plaintiff, by Charles M. Sturges, its attorney, complains of Solomon L. Bignall, Edmond B. Bigelow, Claude Bigelow and Charles J. Glenn, late copartners in business, under the style and firm name of Chicago Lamp Company,\u2019 defendants, etc., of a plea of trespass on the case on promises. For that, whereas, the said defendants heretofore, to wit: On the fifteenth day of September, in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-six, at Chicago, to wit, at the county aforesaid, made their certain note in writing, commonly called a promissory note, bearing date the day and year last aforesaid, and then and there delivered the said note to the said plaintiff, in and by which said note the said defendants, by the name, style and description of \u00a3 Chicago Lamp Co., C, J. Glenn, Treas.,\u2019 promised to pay to the order of said plaintiff, by the name, style and description of \u00a3 Chicago Stamping Co.,\u2019 \u00a7229.94 on the twenty-seventh day of November, in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-six, at. 238 Lake street, in Chicago, in the State of Illinois, for value received. By reason whereof,\u201d etc.\nFive other counts were very like the first. The defendants pleaded in abatement that they were not partners. The plea was a nullity. Karch v. Emerick, 59 Ill. 184.\nThe plea should have been the general issue verified (Ibid.), and until Frankland v. Johnson, 147 Ill. 520, the defendants could not on the trial have disputed their liability. Frankland v. Johnson, 46 Ill. App. 430, and see also Supreme Lodge v. Zulke, 30 Ill. App. 98, S. C. 129 Ill. 298, which cases have introduced a good deal of uncertainty.\nThe court instructed the jury to find for the defendant. This was error and the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Charles M. Sturges, attorney for appellant.",
      "Botsford & Wayne, attorneys for appellees; E. H. Gary, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Chicago Stamping Company v. Solomon L. Bignall, Edmond B. Bigelow and Claude Bigelow, Impleaded with Charles J. Glenn.\n1. Joint Liability\u2014Not To Be Raised Try Plea in Abatement.\u2014The defendants in an action against them as partners upon a promissory-note, pleaded in abatement that they were not partners. The plea was a nullity. To deny their joint liability, etc., the plea should have been the general issue verified. Under the plea as pleaded they could not, on the trial, have disputed their liability.\nMemorandum.\u2014Assumpsit on a promissory note. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. John Barton Payne, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the March term, 1894.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed June 18, 1894.\nThe opinion states the case.\nCharles M. Sturges, attorney for appellant.\nBotsford & Wayne, attorneys for appellees; E. H. Gary, of counsel."
  },
  "file_name": "0312-01",
  "first_page_order": 310,
  "last_page_order": 311
}