{
  "id": 5202751,
  "name": "S. Friedman v. H. Schwabacher and J. Schwabacher",
  "name_abbreviation": "Friedman v. Schwabacher",
  "decision_date": "1897-03-08",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "117",
  "last_page": "118",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "69 Ill. App. 117"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "106 Ill. 281",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2782932
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/106/0281-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "33 Ill. App. 639",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        4989257
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/33/0639-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "115 Ill. 403",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2878520
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/115/0403-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "67 Ill. App. 84",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5191891
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/67/0084-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "64 Ill. App. 422",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5175588
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/64/0422-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 140,
    "char_count": 1500,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.528,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.15633691385096196
    },
    "sha256": "06b0244ac15cacc8b42eeacc6bd94f3440bcba84ed5e7e245de500b49dee9ca1",
    "simhash": "1:471ee6dbd848144a",
    "word_count": 258
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:55:23.961114+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "S. Friedman v. H. Schwabacher and J. Schwabacher"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nAll of the questions but one, presented by this case, are settled adversely to the appellant in the case of the same title as this. 64 Ill. App. 422.\nThat question, not there settled, is whether a fraud perpetrated by the agent of the appellees, in misrepresenting the sanitary condition of the demised premises before the lease\u2014under seal\u2014was made, can be shown by the appellant in avoidance of the lease, and upon that the law is that, at law, fraud in the consideration of a deed is no defense. Todd v. Mitchell, 67 Ill. App. 84; Windett v. Hurlbut, 115 Ill. 403, and Johnson v. Wilson, 33 Ill. App. 639.\nThis last case was upon a lease under seal.\nAll sealed instruments are deeds, whether they be conveyances or executory contracts. Bouvier Law Diet., \u201c Deed.\u201d\nIf the statute concerning negotiable instruments has taken them out of this rule, this case is not affected thereby, as a lease is not embraced by that statute. Canadian Bank v. McCrea, 106 Ill. 281.\nThe judgment is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Blum & Blum, attorneys for appellant.",
      "Ashcraft, Gordon & Cox, attorneys for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "S. Friedman v. H. Schwabacher and J. Schwabacher\n1. Fraud\u2014In the Consideration of Sealed Instruments.\u2014At law, fraud in the consideration of a sealed instrument is no defense.\nAction for Rent,\u2014Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Edward F. Dunne, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the October term, 1896.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed March 8, 1897.\nBlum & Blum, attorneys for appellant.\nAshcraft, Gordon & Cox, attorneys for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0117-01",
  "first_page_order": 115,
  "last_page_order": 116
}