{
  "id": 5151950,
  "name": "Brewer & Hoffman Brewing Company, Impleaded, etc., v. John T. Boddie",
  "name_abbreviation": "Brewer & Hoffman Brewing Co. v. Boddie",
  "decision_date": "1895-06-03",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "45",
  "last_page": "46",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "59 Ill. App. 45"
    }
  ],
  "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. 308",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2963632
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/129/0308-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "30 Ill. App. 98",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2422874
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/30/0098-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 170,
    "char_count": 2298,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.527,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.5757396033482902e-07,
      "percentile": 0.679461814182989
    },
    "sha256": "d40b47c09b309b0e80fa1d6f927502202bfa95a36fa53e87a5ea5cccee99f6b5",
    "simhash": "1:b3a1dea110352d84",
    "word_count": 385
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:53:36.719815+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Brewer & Hoffman Brewing Company, Impleaded, etc., v. John T. Boddie."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nThe appellee sued the appellant for rent upon a lease which purported to be executed by the appellant.\nThe appellant undertook in the court below, and repeats the effort here, to question the execution of the lease by the appellant, but the court peremptorily instructed the jury to find for the appellee.\nThe appellant complains now with more emphasis of the celerity of the court in making the statement that he thought the appellee was entitled to such an instruction, than of the instruction itself.\nThe appellant pleaded non-assumpsit and a plea denying the execution of the lease, followed by an affidavit of merits, concluding with the sentence, \u201c This affiant further says that the above and foregoing plea is true in substance and in fact as is therein alleged.\u201d Which plea ? non-assumpsit or non est factum f\nSuch an affidavit appended to two pleas verifies neither. If charged with perjury in swearing to either, his defense might be that he meant the other; as, if perjury is charged upon two contradictory oaths, the defendant can not be convicted of false swearing in either, simply on the contradiction. 3 Russ, on Crimes, 82.\nOn this pleading, under Sec. 34 of the Practice Act, the defense of non est factum was not open to the appellant. Supreme Lodge v. Zuhlke, 30 Ill. App. 98.\nThere being no other defense, the appellee was entitled to the peremptory instruction. Anderson v. McCormick, 129 Ill. 308.\nThe judgment is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Eunyan & Eunyan, attorneys for appellant.",
      "Wooleolk & Browning, attorneys for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Brewer & Hoffman Brewing Company, Impleaded, etc., v. John T. Boddie.\n1. Practice\u2014Verification of Pleas.\u2014A defendant filed a plea of non-assumpsit and a plea denying the execution of the lease sued on, followed by an affidavit of merits, concluding with the sentence, \u201c This affiant further says that the above and foregoing plea is true in substance and in fact as is therein alleged.\u201d Held, that such an affidavit appended to two pleas verifies neither, and the defense of non est factum is not open to the defendant.\nDebt for Rent.\u2014Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. George F. Blanks, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1895.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed June 3, 1895.\nEunyan & Eunyan, attorneys for appellant.\nWooleolk & Browning, attorneys for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0045-01",
  "first_page_order": 43,
  "last_page_order": 44
}