{
  "id": 2672916,
  "name": "Mary Ann Standley, Appellant, v. Phillip Standley et al., Appellees",
  "name_abbreviation": "Standley v. Standley",
  "decision_date": "1908-04-21",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "278",
  "last_page": "279",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "143 Ill. App. 278"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "20 Ill. App. 495",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        4907039
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/20/0495-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "91 Ill. 167",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2753400
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/91/0167-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 164,
    "char_count": 1788,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.528,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.505882454708161e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5211772964369737
    },
    "sha256": "550635d97e7d916af961040ad79045186fc0068616777a17a1054a4b903d5d67",
    "simhash": "1:0ec946f0f84db6f8",
    "word_count": 301
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:28:23.290304+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Mary Ann Standley, Appellant, v. Phillip Standley et al., Appellees."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Ramsay\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAppellant filed her bill against appellees in the Circuit Court of Shelby county in which she prayed for a divorce from Phillip Standley and for an injunction against him and Oliver M. Standley, and while said cause was pending presented her petition for ternporary alimony and solicitor\u2019s fees, which, on hearing, was denied and appellant ordered to take and have nothing for her support, etc. This appeal followed.\nUpon the hearing a sharp conflict developed in regard to the merits of appellant\u2019s claim for divorce, appellee\u2019s financial ability to care for and support appellant, and in regard to the amount that he had actually expended in her behalf after their separation.\nIt would seem, from an inspection of the abstract, that the appellant showed probable grounds for her claim, which is all the law required upon such a hearing. Jenkins v. Jenkins, 91 Ill. 167; Johnson v. Johnson, 20 Ill. App. 495.\nWe do not deem it necessary to make examination in detail of the record, or to discuss the case at length, as appellees have failed to file any brief as required by rule 29 of this court.\nThe order of the trial court is reversed and the cause remanded.\nReversed and remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Ramsay"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Walter C. Headen and Le Forgee and Vail, for appellant.",
      "No appearance for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Mary Ann Standley, Appellant, v. Phillip Standley et al., Appellees.\nDivorce\u2014what sufficient to establish right to temporary alimony. A wife, a party to a divorce proceeding, in order to establish her right to temporary alimony, need only show probable grounds.\nDivorce. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Shelby county; the Hon. Truman E. Ames, Judge; presiding.\nHeard in this court at the November term, 1907.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed April 21, 1908.\nWalter C. Headen and Le Forgee and Vail, for appellant.\nNo appearance for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0278-01",
  "first_page_order": 296,
  "last_page_order": 297
}