{
  "id": 5200715,
  "name": "The Singer Manufacturing Company v. Otto E. Foster",
  "name_abbreviation": "Singer Manufacturing Co. v. Foster",
  "decision_date": "1896-12-11",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "375",
  "last_page": "376",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "68 Ill. App. 375"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 193,
    "char_count": 2362,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.455,
    "sha256": "8102a0dbd703351e17c017039403345ef240d2f76adf19633121efa9eb06c369",
    "simhash": "1:f8824c9981e56ffc",
    "word_count": 397
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:19:54.666299+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The Singer Manufacturing Company v. Otto E. Foster."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe appellee entered into a written contract with the appellant to act as \u201c supervising salesman \u201d and manager of the appellant\u2019s business at Streator, Ill., in October, 1895, and worked for the company about sixteen weeks. The contract was, in substance, that appellee was to receive in full for all his services except commissions a salary of $12 per week, payable weekly, lost time to be deducted, and was to make \u201c an average of one good and acceptable sale or lease for each week\u2019s salary drawn by him, and agreed to refund five dollars in cash for each sale or lease he fell short of this average,\u201d and for each such failure appellant was to deduct said five dollars from appellee\u2019s commissions.\nIn addition to the above appellee was to receive twenty per cent commission on all approved sales and leases of family sewing machines at retail price made by the appellee.\nThere were other provisions in the contract not necessary to notice.\nThe evidence conclusively shows that appellee failed to make sales or leases of any machines during seven weeks of the sixteen he worked for the company, and fo.r which he had received his salary of $12 per week, and the appellant was entitled to have offset against appellee\u2019s commissions, $35. The evidence shows that appellant only owed appellee on commissions and other accounts, some $26. Yet the jury returned a verdict for appellee for $37, on which judgment was rendered against appellant.\nThe verdict was manifestly against the weight of the evidence.\nThe appellant was entitled to an off-set as against appellee\u2019s account of a sum equal to the entire amount of his claim, hence the verdict should have been in its favor.\nThe judgment of the court below is reversed and the cause not remanded, there being no cause of action, with costs against appellee.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. H. Savary, attorney for appellant,",
      "BE. L. Eichardson, attorney for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The Singer Manufacturing Company v. Otto E. Foster.\n1. Verdicts\u2014Against the Weight of the Evidence. \u2014When the verdict is manifestly against the weight of the evidence a judgment rendered in pursuance thereof will be reversed on appeal\nTranscript, from a justice of the peace, Appeal from the Circuit Court of Kankakee County; the Hon. Charles R. Starr, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the December term, 1896.\nReversed.\nOpinion filed December 11, 1896.\nW. H. Savary, attorney for appellant,\nBE. L. Eichardson, attorney for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0375-01",
  "first_page_order": 373,
  "last_page_order": 374
}