{
  "id": 5097414,
  "name": "John McMahon, Moses W. Johnson and Mary A. Roth v. Robert McColl",
  "name_abbreviation": "McMahon v. McColl",
  "decision_date": "1894-12-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "424",
  "last_page": "424",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "55 Ill. App. 424"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 157,
    "char_count": 1617,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.48,
    "sha256": "da41b7db4cfcbade071a68f0dff14ca93e9463263917333e3612a3efd09eb3c7",
    "simhash": "1:5ebc83d7acb40148",
    "word_count": 277
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:55:31.699098+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "John McMahon, Moses W. Johnson and Mary A. Roth v. Robert McColl."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Waterman\ndelivered the opinion oe the Court.\nThis was an action brought by appellee against appellants to recover compensation for services as bookkeeper, in keeping the accounts of an estate of which they were executors.\nThe questions presented by this record are as to findings upon disputed matters of fact. We would not, upon the record here presented, be justified in overturning the verdict of the jury upon the evidence as to such facts.\nIt does appear that Mrs. Roth did not personally employ appellee, and did not know that he had done any work until after this writ was brought.\nShe was interested in having the labor performed and she, with the other appellants, has received the benefit of the service. In the absence of anything showing that she did not authorize either of her co-executors to employ some one to do this work, we think the judgment against her, as well as that against them, for work done at their instance, may be sustained.\nThe judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Waterman"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Rudolph D. Huszagh, attorney for appellants.",
      "White & Shaw, attorneys for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "John McMahon, Moses W. Johnson and Mary A. Roth v. Robert McColl.\n1. Verdicts \u2014When Not Set Aside.\u2014A verdict of a jury will not be set aside unless it is against the manifest weight of the evidence.\nMemorandum.\u2014Assumpsit. In the Circuit Court of Cook County, on appeal from a justice of the peace; the Hon. Thomas G-. Windes, Judge, presiding. Trial by jury; verdict and judgment for plaintiff; appeal by defendant. Heard in this court at the October term, 1894, and affirmed.\nOpinion filed December 6, 1894.\nRudolph D. Huszagh, attorney for appellants.\nWhite & Shaw, attorneys for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0424-01",
  "first_page_order": 420,
  "last_page_order": 420
}