{
  "id": 5175159,
  "name": "Augustus Sparr et al. v. William W. Sutherland",
  "name_abbreviation": "Sparr v. Sutherland",
  "decision_date": "1896-04-27",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "160",
  "last_page": "161",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "64 Ill. App. 160"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 117,
    "char_count": 1198,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.545,
    "sha256": "d66e69888f108da99e7b6d504a16366ccf82d4610e4121878fa3638dbe57ba63",
    "simhash": "1:d8f96e3465952b9b",
    "word_count": 196
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:42:36.948645+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Augustus Sparr et al. v. William W. Sutherland."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Waterman\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nThis was an action of assumpsit brought to recover the price of a carload of lumber sold to appellants.\nThe defense was a claim for damages for failure to ship fourteen car loads of lumber alleged to have been contracted \u25a0 for by appellants.\nThe court found that no such contract was proven, and in. this conclusion we agree.\nWe do not find from an examination of the abstract that any prejudical error was committed by the court in admitting in evidence papers offered by appellee, or that any error warranting a reversal of the judgment is shown. The merits are clearly with appellee. ... - . .\nThe judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Waterman"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "William Pettis, attorney for appellant.",
      "Hoyne, Follansbee & O\u2019Connor, attorneys for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Augustus Sparr et al. v. William W. Sutherland.\n1. Appellate Court Practice \u2014 Abstract Must Show Error.\u2014 Where an examination of the abstract shows no prejudicial error the judgment will be affirmed.\nAssumpsit, for goods sold. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the March term, 1896.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 27, 1896.\nWilliam Pettis, attorney for appellant.\nHoyne, Follansbee & O\u2019Connor, attorneys for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0160-01",
  "first_page_order": 158,
  "last_page_order": 159
}