{
  "id": 5100425,
  "name": "Antoine Delfosse v. Marcellus Thomas",
  "name_abbreviation": "Delfosse v. Thomas",
  "decision_date": "1894-04-30",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "635",
  "last_page": "636",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "54 Ill. App. 635"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 118,
    "char_count": 1437,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.486,
    "sha256": "bb4516a673d9d36870c5740c744509a7ee2f87102dafca6964cc51b5009fc3f6",
    "simhash": "1:a095c0909633a670",
    "word_count": 242
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:49:51.601388+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Antoine Delfosse v. Marcellus Thomas."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Waterman\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nThis was an action brought by appellee to recover a balance of wages claimed to be due to him.\nThe cause was brought in a justice court; appellee there recovered judgment. On appeal to the Superior Court appellee was again successful.\nIt is perhaps the case that each of these judgments was unjust; the appellant certainly does not appear to have made a merely vexatious defense. Judging from the record before us, appellee does not seem to have a preponderance of the evidence, but we do not reverse judgments merely because upon reading the record the evidence does not seem to preponderate in favor of the party in whose favor the finding was; something more than this must be shown.\nThis is all that appears here, and the judgment of the Superior Court must be affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Waterman"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "F. H. Trude, attorney for appellant.",
      "Oscar E. Leinen, attorney for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Antoine Delfosse v. Marcellus Thomas.\n1. Judgments\u2014Reversal of\u2014Preponderance of Evidence.\u2014The Appellate Court will not reverse judgments merely because upon reading the record the evidence does not seem to preponderate in favor of the party in whose favor the finding was; something more than this must be shown.\nMemorandum.\u2014Assumpsit for wages. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. John Barton Payne, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the March term, 1894,\nand affirmed.\nOpinion filed April 30, 1894.\nF. H. Trude, attorney for appellant.\nOscar E. Leinen, attorney for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0635-01",
  "first_page_order": 633,
  "last_page_order": 634
}