{
  "id": 2651633,
  "name": "John G. Barnes v. Edwin C. Johnson",
  "name_abbreviation": "Barnes v. Johnson",
  "decision_date": "1876-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "95",
  "last_page": "96",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "84 Ill. 95"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 144,
    "char_count": 1655,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.514,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 3.5884075068921014e-07,
      "percentile": 0.887108862331356
    },
    "sha256": "09ccbb6cf13de3914d9bafb08ec18f96fbe75ec6d3baaec36c64585dbb4f5c98",
    "simhash": "1:898728e3299b0f70",
    "word_count": 277
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:17:00.226499+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "John G. Barnes v. Edwin C. Johnson."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Scott\ndelivered the opinion of the Court:\nAlthough the evidence is not entirely satisfactory, still it is sufficient to justify the finding defendant let to rent the entire building, as well that part which belonged to plaintiff as that which belonged to himself, and, having received rents from the occupying tenants that belonged to plaintiff, there is no reason why he should not recover.\nThe action for money had and received is an equitable action, and lies wherever one party has obtained money which, in equity and good conscience, he ought not to be permitted to retain. That is this exact case. Bents received by defendant from the tenants rightfully belonged to plaintiff\u2014at least the jury have so found; and if so, it would be inequitable to permit defend\u00e1nt to retain money that of right belongs to plaintiff.\nIt may be that all the instructions given for plaintiff are not strictly correct. Slight errors, on a severe criticism, may, no doubt, be detected; but, then, the instructions' given for defendant were so favorable to his theory of the case, we can not believe the jury were misled.\nSubstantial justice has been done, and the judgment will be affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Scott"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Marshall & Sterrett, for the appellant.",
      "Messrs. Stewart & Phelps, for the appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "John G. Barnes v. Edwin C. Johnson.\nMonet had and received\u2014when action lies. The action for money had and received is an equitable action, and lies wjierever one party has obtained money which, in equity and good conscience, he ought not to he permitted to retain.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Warren county; the Hon. Arthur A. Smith, Judge, presiding.\nMessrs. Marshall & Sterrett, for the appellant.\nMessrs. Stewart & Phelps, for the appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0095-01",
  "first_page_order": 95,
  "last_page_order": 96
}