{
  "id": 4865736,
  "name": "Louis Schlierbach et al. v. City of Pana",
  "name_abbreviation": "Schlierbach v. City of Pana",
  "decision_date": "1883-09-21",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "382",
  "last_page": "383",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "13 Ill. App. 382"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "98 Ill. 343",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2835789
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/98/0343-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "106 Ill. 532",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2783417
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "542"
        },
        {
          "page": "547"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/106/0532-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 110,
    "char_count": 1272,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.519,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.1541120737154946
    },
    "sha256": "2dd4c738786ba83733e2318440bb12d80dd0b7242d21c9b81ffe7bd8fdbc1a9d",
    "simhash": "1:01be4ff09c933441",
    "word_count": 212
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:57:34.030277+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Louis Schlierbach et al. v. City of Pana."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThis was a proceeding in the county court to make a special assessment upon contiguous property for the purpose of improving one of the public streets of the city of Pana. The court having appointed commissioners to make the assessment and their report having been filed, appellants appeared and filed objections to its confirmation. A jury trial was had which resulted in a confirmation of the report of the commissioners, and a judgment against appellants for costs. From, the order confirming the report of the commissioners and said judgment for costs this appeal was taken.\nThis is a case relating to the revenue and this court can not take jurisdiction of it: Potwin v. Johnson, 106 Ill. 532; The People, etc., v. Springer, Ibid. 542; Herhold v. City of Chicago, Ibid. 547; Webster v. The People, etc., 98 Ill. 343.\nThe appeal will therefore be dismissed.\nAppeal dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Essiok, Humphreys & Vandeveer, for appellants.",
      "Mr. J. W. Kitohell, Mr. E. J. Searle and Mr. A. Mc-Caskill, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Louis Schlierbach et al. v. City of Pana.\nJurisdiction.\u2014This court can not take jurisdiction of a case relating to the revenue.\nAppeal from the Connty Court of Christian county; tlie Hon. V. E. For, Judge, presiding.\nOpinion filed September 21, 1883.\nMessrs. Essiok, Humphreys & Vandeveer, for appellants.\nMr. J. W. Kitohell, Mr. E. J. Searle and Mr. A. Mc-Caskill, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0382-02",
  "first_page_order": 386,
  "last_page_order": 387
}