{
  "id": 5155754,
  "name": "Beck Brothers v. Independent Brewing Association et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Beck Bros. v. Independent Brewing Ass'n",
  "decision_date": "1895-10-31",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "423",
  "last_page": "424",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "60 Ill. App. 423"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "60 Ill. App. 344",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5157377
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/60/0344-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 160,
    "char_count": 1910,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.482,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.15583340959260558
    },
    "sha256": "f8033713868bc827763193b240a85da72bdc33464e3dcf8629c0ef2ef8784a00",
    "simhash": "1:578131ef8616a21b",
    "word_count": 335
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:22:36.351146+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Beck Brothers v. Independent Brewing Association et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nThe parties have here argued the question which we have decided in favor of the appellants in Wilkins v. English, 60 Ill. App. 344, but that question is not in this case.\nJanuary 22,1895, the appellees, defendants below, filed a \u201c special appearance for the sole purpose of moving the court to dismiss the plaintiffs\u2019 suit for the failure to file the declaration within the time required by the statute,\u201d and on the same day obtained an order of the court \u201c that the time to plead herein be and the same is extended ten days.\u201d\nThis waived the right of the appellees to object to the time at which the declaration had been filed. Such objection, if valid, would be only in abatement of this suit\u2014not in bar of any\u2014and should therefore be made without taking any step to defend upon the merits. It makes no difference which was first\u2014-the appearance or the order\u2014the effect is the same.\nThe judgment is reversed with directions to the Circuit Court to set aside the order dismissing the suit and awarding a retorno Tiabendo, and to reinstate the cause for further proceedings.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Morris Frisch, attorney for appellants.",
      "Sohintz & Ives, attorneys for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Beck Brothers v. Independent Brewing Association et al.\n1. Waiver\u2014Declaration Not Filed in Time.\u2014The right to object that\" the declaration is not filed in time is waived by asking for and obtaining an extension of time in which to plead.\n2. Declaration\u2014Not Filed in Time\u2014When to Object.\u2014The objection that the declaration is not filed in time, if well taken, is in abatement only, and not in bar of the suit, and must be made before any steps are taken to defend the suit upon its merits.\nReplevin,\u2014Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Baker, Judge, presiding.- Heard in this court at the October term, 1895.\nReversed with directions.\nOpinion filed October 31, 1895.\nMorris Frisch, attorney for appellants.\nSohintz & Ives, attorneys for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0423-01",
  "first_page_order": 421,
  "last_page_order": 422
}