{
  "id": 4276576,
  "name": "JOANN M. COGLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION et al., Defendants-Appellees",
  "name_abbreviation": "Cogley v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.",
  "decision_date": "2008-03-13",
  "docket_number": "No. 2-05-1198",
  "first_page": "957",
  "last_page": "958",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "379 Ill. App. 3d 957"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "226 Ill. 2d 307",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        3610870
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2007,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/226/0307-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "368 Ill. App. 3d 91",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        4266075
      ],
      "year": 2006,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/368/0091-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 118,
    "char_count": 1318,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.76,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.14351106956428733
    },
    "sha256": "82ccf0e5fe460314061a81e402b27f80b8f2244810f51152a733d1d2acf261d1",
    "simhash": "1:36ca03ec246b46cf",
    "word_count": 204
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:50:11.340315+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "JOANN M. COGLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION et al., Defendants-Appellees."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE McLAREN\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThe supreme court, in the exercise of its supervisory authority, directed this court to vacate its decision in Cogley v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 368 Ill. App. 3d 91 (2006), and to reconsider our judgment in light of Mydlach v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 226 Ill. 2d 307 (2007). We hereby vacate our decision.\nThe parties have moved to dismiss the appeal by agreement. We therefore dismiss this appeal and will not reconsider our decision in light of Mydlach v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 226 Ill. 2d 307 (2007).\nPursuant to the agreement of the parties, \u201c[pllaintiff s complaint is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to settlement with each party to bear its own costs of litigation, and this matter is remanded to the trial court for the purpose of jurisdiction as to the settlement only.\u201d\nAppellate court judgment vacated and appeal dismissed; cause remanded.\nBYRNE, EJ., and BOWMAN, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE McLAREN"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Rebecca J. Letourneaux, of Consumer Legal Services, EC., of Elmhurst, for appellant.",
      "Timothy Y Hoffman and Michelle A. Franz, both of Sanchez, Daniels & Hoffman LLP of Chicago, for appellee DaimlerChrysler Corporation."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "JOANN M. COGLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION et al., Defendants-Appellees.\nSecond District\nNo. 2\u201405\u20141198\nOpinion filed March 13, 2008.\nRebecca J. Letourneaux, of Consumer Legal Services, EC., of Elmhurst, for appellant.\nTimothy Y Hoffman and Michelle A. Franz, both of Sanchez, Daniels & Hoffman LLP of Chicago, for appellee DaimlerChrysler Corporation."
  },
  "file_name": "0957-01",
  "first_page_order": 973,
  "last_page_order": 974
}