J. W. Hoodwin Co. v. Pinkerton

Appellate Court of Illinois

J. W. Hoodwin Co. v. Pinkerton

204 Ill. App. 298, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 368

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedMarch 12, 1917

DocketGen. No. 22,713

StatusPublished

This text of 204 Ill. App. 298 (J. W. Hoodwin Co. v. Pinkerton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

J. W. Hoodwin Co. v. Pinkerton, 204 Ill. App. 298, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 368 (Ill. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. Partnership, § 52*—when evidence is insufficient to show. Evidence held insufficient to show that certain defendants, appellants, were connected in any way, as partners or otherwise, with a certain detective agency, to an agent of which plaintiff paid a certain sum of money, in an action to recover such money.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. Partnership, § 52*—when evidence is insufficient to show. Evidence held insufficient to show that certain defendants, appellants, were connected in any way, as partners or otherwise, with a certain detective agency, to an agent of which plaintiff paid a certain sum of money, in an action to recover such money.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 Ill. App. 298, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-w-hoodwin-co-v-pinkerton-illappct-1917.