{
  "id": 5168318,
  "name": "Guy Lyon and Harry Lyon, for use of William R. Mumford, William O. Mumford, Isaiah O. Harsh, Copartners as W. R. Mumford & Company, v. Crew Levick Company",
  "name_abbreviation": "Lyon ex rel. Mumford v. Crew Levick Co.",
  "decision_date": "1896-03-31",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "329",
  "last_page": "330",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "63 Ill. App. 329"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "32 Ill. 446",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2453807
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/32/0446-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 204,
    "char_count": 2689,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.538,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.15595407299807826
    },
    "sha256": "b5fcc0ff3b89227d17fca3ef0553307d9d7641a9e6d9b5338ef625934aea400a",
    "simhash": "1:145a13b12ca1c75d",
    "word_count": 469
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:54:49.987215+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Guy Lyon and Harry Lyon, for use of William R. Mumford, William O. Mumford, Isaiah O. Harsh, Copartners as W. R. Mumford & Company, v. Crew Levick Company."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion op the Court.\nAugust 15, 1895, a garnishee summons against the appellee, in favor of the appellants, was issued by a justice of the peace and served on the appellee, to which it paid no attention. Then a conditional judgment having been entered, a scire facias was issued and served upon the appellee, and still it paid no attention, and judgment was entered against the appellee September 12, 1895. In all the proceedings thus far stated the word \u201c oil \u201d was interpolated in the name of the appellee, so that it read the \u201c Crew Levick Oil Company.\u201d\nBoth writs were served upon F. B. De Beck, agent, who was, in fact, manager of the appellee, and so signed the bond given on the appeal by certiorari, hereinafter stated.\nOctober 9, 1895, appellee filed a petition for a certiorari, verified, not by De Beck, but by one who says by affidavit, sworn October 8, 1895, \u201cthat he is superintendent of\u201d the appellee, in which petition it is stated that the appellee \u201c had no knowledge or information of the commencement or pendency of a suit against it, or of the rendition of said judgment,\u201d until a copy of an execution was delivered to it October 7, 1895.\nDe Beck was the man who was served. JSTotice to him was notice to the appellee.\nThe theory of the petition is that a misnomer of a corporation in writs served upon it renders the writs void. That is not the law. Railroad v. Reidmond, 11 Lea (Tenn.), 205; Mora. Corp., Sec. 355; Hammond v. People, 32 Ill. 446. See separate opinion of Judge Breese, pp. 472-3. This is a clear case of neglect by the appellee to appeal in the ordinary way.\nThe appellants were justified in declining to try the case again, and the judgment of the Circuit Court dismissing their suit is reversed, and the cause remanded with directions to the Circuit Court to dismiss the petition at the cost of the appellee here. The appellants recover their costs in this court.\nReversed and remanded with directions.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "C. Van Alen Smith, attorney for appellants.",
      "Bayle & Miller, attorneys for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Guy Lyon and Harry Lyon, for use of William R. Mumford, William O. Mumford, Isaiah O. Harsh, Copartners as W. R. Mumford & Company, v. Crew Levick Company.\n1. Notice\u2014To Agents of Corporations.\u2014A notice properly served upon an agent who is the manager of a corporation is notice to the corporation.\n\u2022 2. Misnomer\u2014In Writs\u2014A misnomer in a writ served upon a defendant does not render the writ void.\nGarnishee Proceedings.\u2014Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Abner Smith, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1896.\nReversed and remanded with directions.\nOpinion filed March 31, 1896.\nC. Van Alen Smith, attorney for appellants.\nBayle & Miller, attorneys for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0329-01",
  "first_page_order": 325,
  "last_page_order": 326
}