{
  "id": 5273134,
  "name": "George Weaver v. John Rylander",
  "name_abbreviation": "Weaver v. Rylander",
  "decision_date": "1870-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "529",
  "last_page": "530",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "55 Ill. 529"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 139,
    "char_count": 1779,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.524,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.068721054879678e-08,
      "percentile": 0.31990648875668043
    },
    "sha256": "f5d1017847dc9cd7b25fab4fc714304340eeeb24a21642a1f0033f44c1c889ec",
    "simhash": "1:5083f8494bcabffa",
    "word_count": 298
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:50:07.666540+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "George Weaver v. John Rylander."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam :\nIn this case appellee claimed a small amount to be due to him, from appellant, for work and labor. Appellant claimed that he had settled by the payment of five dollars. The court gave the following instruction for appellee:\n\u201c If the jury believe, from the evidence, that the defendant paid plaintiff five dollars, and then told him to go to W. A. Tanner, and collect of him the amount of the work done for said Tanner, in full settlement of the matter in controversy between them, (the plaintiff and defendant,) and in pursuance of said arrangement the plaintiff took the five dollars, and if the jury further believe, from the evidence, that the defendant afterwards collected the amount so due from said Tanner, then the plaintiff would be entitled to recover the amount so due and collected from said Tanner, for such work; if the jury believe further, from the evidence, that Tanner demanded back the money paid to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff did pay it to him.\u201d\nThere is no evidence in the record that appellant told appellee to collect any amount from Tanner. This would have been an acknowledgment of an indebtedness greater than five dollars. The appellant, in his testimony, and through other witnesses, disputed this assumption.\nIt was, therefore, manifest error in the court below to assume a fact so important and materially affecting the rights of appellant, without any proof.\nThe judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.\nJudgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam :"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Parks & Annis, for the appellant.",
      "Mr. C. J. Metzner, for the appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "George Weaver v. John Rylander.\nInstructions should be based on the evidence.\nAppeal from the Court of Common Pleas of the city of Aurora; the Hon. R. G. Montony, Judge, presiding.\nThe opinion sufficiently states the case.\nMessrs. Parks & Annis, for the appellant.\nMr. C. J. Metzner, for the appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0529-01",
  "first_page_order": 529,
  "last_page_order": 530
}