{
  "id": 2793916,
  "name": "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, vs. Dolores Rauschenberg et al., Plaintiffs in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Rauschenberg",
  "decision_date": "1961-11-30",
  "docket_number": "No. 36531",
  "first_page": "511",
  "last_page": "512",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "23 Ill. 2d 511"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "29 Ill. App. 2d 293",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5220723
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/29/0293-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 119,
    "char_count": 1290,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.771,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.871964132982944e-08,
      "percentile": 0.45976966224671784
    },
    "sha256": "b75eb9ec08ae8d22d44ac8572b740daa7d008e4eb7ddc1ba27948cd1b1bc224b",
    "simhash": "1:0a7c6703ca0cd9ed",
    "word_count": 213
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:46:42.308421+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, vs. Dolores Rauschenberg et al., Plaintiffs in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice House\ndelivered the opinion of the court: Dolores Rauschenberg and Frank Kreigl, two of three defendants, were convicted of resisting an officer in the county court of Du Page County. Their motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment were overruled, and judgments were entered on the verdicts. They sued out a writ of error to the Appellate Court, Second District, which affirmed the judgment of the county court. (29 Ill. App. 2d 293.) They are here on a further writ of error to review their conviction.\nEach of defendants\u2019 assignments of error in this court were fully considered and resolved adversely to them in the Appellate Court. We concur with the determination of the Appellate Court, and its opinion is adopted as the opinion of this court.\nT t,Judgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice House"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Julius L. Sherwin and Theodore R. Sherwin, both of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.",
      "William G. Clark, Attorney General, of Springfield, and William J. Bauer, State\u2019s Attorney, of Wheaton, (Fred G. Leach, Assistant Attorney General, and Donald J. Hennessy, Assistant State\u2019s Attorney, of counsel,) for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 36531.\nThe People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, vs. Dolores Rauschenberg et al., Plaintiffs in Error.\nOpinion filed Nov. 30, 1961.\nRehearing denied Jan. 22, 1962.\nJulius L. Sherwin and Theodore R. Sherwin, both of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.\nWilliam G. Clark, Attorney General, of Springfield, and William J. Bauer, State\u2019s Attorney, of Wheaton, (Fred G. Leach, Assistant Attorney General, and Donald J. Hennessy, Assistant State\u2019s Attorney, of counsel,) for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0511-01",
  "first_page_order": 511,
  "last_page_order": 512
}