{
  "id": 5202598,
  "name": "Ignatz Hasterlik et al. v. Henry Sangerman",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hasterlik v. Sangerman",
  "decision_date": "1897-03-08",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "146",
  "last_page": "147",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "69 Ill. App. 146"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "161 Ill. 47",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3123609
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/161/0047-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "63 Ill. App. 289",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5170966
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/63/0289-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 199,
    "char_count": 2366,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.55,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.15633536935937192
    },
    "sha256": "cec9fbd0f1537e3fd3e208fb1c1af258da68d4f62079aea6c2095f5e85c17f7f",
    "simhash": "1:204f77242cc30dc8",
    "word_count": 403
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:55:23.961114+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Ignatz Hasterlik et al. v. Henry Sangerman."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nThe abstract states as the declaration what is a count in -trover, and .later says \u201c trover, count and declaration disr missed by plaintiff;\u201d yet neither in the Circuit Court nor here, by motion in arrest or assignment of error, is any want of sufficient pleadings made a ground of objection to the judgment.\nThe action seems to have been by the appellee against the appellants\u2014plaintiffs in an execution\u2014for directing, and against a constable for making, a levy of that execution upon property of the appellant, exempt from execution.\nThe brief of the appellants says, \u201c there are several rulings to which exceptions were taken, but by far the most important one relates to the schedules. Of these, two were referred to in the testimony.\u201d The abstract shows no schedule, but refers to a page of the record for one. Schmitt v. Devine, 63 Ill. App. 289; City Electric Ry. Co. v. Jones 161 Ill. 47.\nThe insufficiency of the abstract is objected to in the brief of appellee, but the appellants have paid no attention to the objection. There is evidence fairly tending to show that the appellants directed the levy, and it was made, whether rightfully or wrongfully, we have no means of knowing.\nUpon the question of the value of the property taken, there may be some uncertainty, but upon testimony which, upon the trial was not objected to, the court, by requiring a remittitur down to $250, seems to have been satisfied, that that sum was not excessive, and we can not determine from the evidence whether it was or not. The appellee testified that \u201cthe stock was of all kinds of wines and liquors,about $250 worth,\u201d besides cigars, tobacco, cigarettes and pipes.\nThe presumption is that the judgment is right, unless it is shown to be wrong, and it is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Blum & Blum, attorneys for appellants.",
      "Moses, Pam & Kennedy, attorneys for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Ignatz Hasterlik et al. v. Henry Sangerman.\n1. Appellate Court Practice\u2014Affirmance on Insufficient Abstract. . \u2014An abstract which does not show the matters upon which rulings of \u2022 the court were excepted to, but merely refers to a page of the record for .them, is insufficient.\nTrover.\u2014Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. \" Henry V. Freeman, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the Ocitober term, 1896.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed March 8, 1897.\nBlum & Blum, attorneys for appellants.\nMoses, Pam & Kennedy, attorneys for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0146-01",
  "first_page_order": 144,
  "last_page_order": 145
}