{
  "id": 5101645,
  "name": "George M. Furness v. H. T. Helm and E. A. Aborn",
  "name_abbreviation": "Furness v. Helm",
  "decision_date": "1894-06-18",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "435",
  "last_page": "437",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "54 Ill. App. 435"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "27 Ill. App. 166",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        4955512
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/27/0166-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "78 Ill. 506",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "44 Ill. App. 327",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5067798
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/44/0327-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 240,
    "char_count": 3461,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.496,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.4033266686372354e-08,
      "percentile": 0.33924680550873815
    },
    "sha256": "eea66cd8694cea4a54acfaeaa730a516645b396a65caad57b73fa94fee408e64",
    "simhash": "1:dbde63899a3d8751",
    "word_count": 603
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:49:51.601388+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "George M. Furness v. H. T. Helm and E. A. Aborn."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gary\ndelivebed the opinion of the Coubt.\nIn half a dozen cases, see them collected -in Barnes v. Sisson, 44 Ill. App. 327, this court has had before it questions relating to affidavits by defendants on appeal from justices of the peace. In this case a new one is presented.\nThe plaintiffs having filed before the justice an affidavit of claim, may the court dismiss the appeal, if the defendant files no affidavit of merits when the case is called for trial ?\nIn effect the question is answered in the negative in the case cited, for it was there held that the defendant was entitled, without any affidavit, to make any defense going only to reduce damages. This right is cut off by dismissing the appeal.\nThe statute in effect provides that before the justice, the plaintiff\u2019s affidavit, in case of default by the defendant, shall Y>&prima facie evidence of the amount due him, and \u201c that in cases of appeal from the judgment of the justice of the peace, as aforesaid, such affidavit shall have the same force and effect in the \"Appellate Court as if said suit had been commenced in such Appellate Court.\u201d Sec. 34, Ch. 79, Justices. In the Appellate Court the affidavit of the plaintiff has two distinct effects: one is to prevent the defendant from putting in a plea unless \u201c he shall file with his plea an affidavit.\u201d Sec. 37, Ch. 110, Practice. The Supreme Court in effect held in Goldie v. McDonald, 78 Ill. 506, that \u201c with \u201d as to the plaintiff\u2019s affidavit, was used in the statute in the sense of Webster\u2019s-second definition, \u201c to denote association in respect of situation or environment\u201d rot simultaneous happening. Whatever meaning \u201c with \u201d has in one part of the section it should have in the other. Mow, in the \u201c Appellate Court,\u201d the defendant can not \u201c file with his plea an affidavit,\u201d because he does not file a plea at all. As no plea is filed, nothing can be filed \u201c with \u201d it.\nUpon like reasoning we held in Morgan v. Campbell, Mo. 5023, that on appeal the defendant could not have an affirmative judgment or a set-off if the plaintiff did not appear when the case was called for trial, but could only have a non-suit.\nUnder Sec. 38 Ch. 110, Practice, the plaintiff\u2019s affidavit is in the \u201c Appellate Court,\u201d as in the'justice court, prima facie evidence for the plaintiff in case of. default of the defendant, and this seems to be all that was intended by the legislature.\nThe attention of the court has not before been directed to this aspect of the question. It has heretofore been assumed without much consideration, that to defend, the defendant must file an affidavit, but the question was never the ground of decision. Martin v. Hochslanter, 27 Ill. App. 166.\nThe judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Cruikshank & Atwood, attorneys for appellant.",
      "H. T. Helm and E. A. Aborn, pro se."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "George M. Furness v. H. T. Helm and E. A. Aborn.\n1. Practice&emdash;Failure to File Affidavit with Plea, etc.&emdash;On the trial in the Circuit Court of an appeal from a justice of the peace, the plaintiff having filed an affidavit of his claim before the justice, the defendant, although he files no affidavit of merits, is still entitled to make any defense going only to reduce the damages.\nMemor\u00e1ndum.&emdash;Assumpsit in justice\u2019s court. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the March term, 1894.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed June 18, 1894.\nCruikshank & Atwood, attorneys for appellant.\nH. T. Helm and E. A. Aborn, pro se."
  },
  "file_name": "0435-01",
  "first_page_order": 433,
  "last_page_order": 435
}