{
  "id": 2588606,
  "name": "R. G. Mathews, Sheriff, v. W. W. Kimball Co.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Mathews v. W. W. Kimball Co.",
  "decision_date": "1902-07-18",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "28",
  "last_page": "29",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "103 Ill. App. 28"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "197 Ill. 220",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        844023
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/197/0220-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "127 Ill. 251",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5410974
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/127/0251-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 168,
    "char_count": 2273,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.538,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.08240480429554001
    },
    "sha256": "58ed9c6135fee8817b284a2e3225e0e44b32ffd68a381d001b4e75908f3b87d4",
    "simhash": "1:c68f9dadacabef87",
    "word_count": 401
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:00:05.984899+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "R. G. Mathews, Sheriff, v. W. W. Kimball Co."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Hig-bee\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThis was a suit brought by appellee to recover possession of a piano, from appellant, the sheriff of Knox county, who claimed to hold it under an execution issued from the County Court of said county.\nIn the Circuit Court to which the case was taken by appeal from a justice of the peace, there was a trial by the court without the intervention of a jury, which resulted in favor of appellee. Ho propositions of law were submitted to the court below, no exception to the finding or judgment of the court was preserved in the bill of exceptions and there was no dispute as to the facts.\nIt is true that the clerk has included in the record what purports to be an exception to the judgment but this is not sufficient.\nIn Gould v. Howe, 127 Ill. 251, where numerous cases are cited in support of the proposition, it is said:\n\u201c It is immaterial that the recitals in the orders entered by the clerk may show exception to the judgment, and the submission and rulings thereon of propositions of law under the 42d section of the practice act. These are matters that can only become a part of the record bv being incorporated in the bill of exceptions, and the clerk\u2019s recitals in that respect are, therefore, extra official, and of no legal effect.\u201d See also Aden v. Road Dist. No. 3, 197 Ill. 220.\nThere is therefore no question presented for the determination of this court and the judgment of the court below is accordingly affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Hig-bee"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Shumwat & Bice, attorneys for appellant.",
      "E. 0. Hunt, attorney for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "R. G. Mathews, Sheriff, v. W. W. Kimball Co.\n1. Practice\u2014Recitals in Orders Entered by Cleric Are Extra Judicial.\u2014It is immaterial that the recitals in orders entered by the clerk may show exception to the judgment, and the submission and rulings thereon of propositions of law under the 43d section of the practice act. These are matters that'.can only become a part of the record by-being incorporated in the bill of exceptions and the clerk\u2019s recitals in that respect are, therefore, extra official and of no legal effect.\nReplevin.\u2014Appeal from the Circuit Court of Knox County; the Hon. George W. Thompson, Judge presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1903.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed July 18, 1902.\nShumwat & Bice, attorneys for appellant.\nE. 0. Hunt, attorney for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0028-01",
  "first_page_order": 58,
  "last_page_order": 59
}