{
  "id": 5173777,
  "name": "L. J. Strause and Callie Mulvany, Co-partners as Strause & Mulvany v. The Owen Electric Belt & Appliance Co.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Strause v. Owen Electric Belt & Appliance Co.",
  "decision_date": "1896-06-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "435",
  "last_page": "436",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "64 Ill. App. 435"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "53 Ill. App. 155",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        858622
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/53/0155-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "161 Ill. 47",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3123609
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/161/0047-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "29 Ill. 473",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2452606
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/29/0473-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 208,
    "char_count": 2431,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.54,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.1560029175446136
    },
    "sha256": "9bb329d01fb770a762eaad43d09b91b73a031018286633a82e22f059cbb2f9ca",
    "simhash": "1:0292204827a52e75",
    "word_count": 421
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:42:36.948645+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "L. J. Strause and Callie Mulvany, Co-partners as Strause & Mulvany v. The Owen Electric Belt & Appliance Co."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion oe the Court.\nAs to what this case is about, the abstract tells us; \u201cJW. First count, special on a lease, and common counts.\u201d We guess it is an action for unpaid rent, about which there could be no dispute. The appellants\u2019 attorneys becoming engaged in a trial before another court, so that they could not attend to this case, advised the appellants to employ other attorneys, which advice the appellants declined to follow and the case was not attended to at all.\nAfter judgment the appellants applied to have the judgment set aside, first, because there was no similiter to the general issue, which in the last generation was characterized by the Supreme Court as a \u201c frivolous objection \u201d (Gillespie v. Smith, 29 Ill. 473); second, because the appellants have sustained damages\u2014which are unliquidated\u2014by the failure of the appellee to perform its covenants in some lease made by it to the appellants; but whether it is the same lease upon which this suit is brought, does not appear by the abstract.\nThe latest of the numerous cases' in which the Supreme Court has said that everything on which error is assigned must appear in the abstract, that has come to our notice, is City Electric Ry. v. Jones, 161 Ill. 47. We do not go beyond the abstract in favor of an appellant.\nThen as unliquidated damages can not be the subject of a set-off, unless they grew out of the same subject-matter as the ground of the action (Brooks v. Brady, 53 Ill. App. 155), the abstract does not show that the damages claimed could have been used as a defense to this suit. But if they could the appellants can still sue for their damages. Palmer v. Harris, 98 111. 507.\nThere is no error and the judgment is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Hamilton & Fullenwider, attorneys for appellants.",
      "Joseph H. Fitch, attorney for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "L. J. Strause and Callie Mulvany, Co-partners as Strause & Mulvany v. The Owen Electric Belt & Appliance Co.\n1. Pleading\u2014Adding the Similiter. \u2014A judgment will not be reversed because of an omission to add a similiter to the general issue before going to trial.\n2. Appellate Court Practice\u2014Whof the Abstract Must Show.\u2014 Matters upon which error is assigned must be made to appear in the abstract.\n\u25a0 Assumpsit, for rents. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Philip Stein, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the March term, 1896.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed June 1, 1896.\nHamilton & Fullenwider, attorneys for appellants.\nJoseph H. Fitch, attorney for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0435-01",
  "first_page_order": 433,
  "last_page_order": 434
}