Case Name: Dora Mindelsohn, Defendant in Error, v. The Modern Protective Association, Plaintiff in Error
Court: Illinois Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1912-10-03
Citations: 173 Ill. App. 52
Docket Number: Gen. No. 16,803
Parties: Dora Mindelsohn, Defendant in Error, v. The Modern Protective Association, Plaintiff in Error.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Appellate Court Reports
Volume: 173
Pages: 52–52

Head Matter:
Dora Mindelsohn, Defendant in Error, v. The Modern Protective Association, Plaintiff in Error.
Gen. No. 16,803.
Appeals and errors—abstract. Where a plaintiff in error files an abstract of record printed in smaller type than that required by the rule of the Appellate Court, the judgment will be affirmed.
Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Max Eberhardt, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1910.
Affirmed.
Opinion filed October 3, 1912.
Clyde O. Garmire and James N. Tilton, for plaintiff in error.
David R. Levy and Douglas C. Gregg, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice McSurely
delivered the opinion of the court.
As in case No. 16,802, decided at this term of court, ante, p. 51 the judgment in this cause must be affirmed for the reason that plaintiff in error has the abstract of record printed with a smaller type than the type required by Rule 19, Appellate Court, First District.
Therefore, for want of a sufficient abstract of record, the judgment is affirmed.
In addition, we may say that from an examination of the record herein, we are of the opinion that even if plaintiff in error had complied with the above rule, the judgment should nevertheless be affirmed.
Affirmed.