{
  "id": 2718772,
  "name": "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Robert E. Cantwell, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Cantwell",
  "decision_date": "1911-04-13",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 15,221",
  "first_page": "652",
  "last_page": "653",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "160 Ill. App. 652"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "148 Ill. App. 182",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2647487
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/148/0182-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 201,
    "char_count": 2430,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.463,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.08378133242517227
    },
    "sha256": "a9a881dd11e96158582f6a06d7b90301b0e2ed03833d7e447ea45f0df81c8aea",
    "simhash": "1:a5a29d088e4ab816",
    "word_count": 425
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:25:51.885060+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, v. Robert E. Cantwell, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Brown\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThe plaintiff in error was found guilty by a jury in the Municipal Court of assault and battery and fined $75 and costs. The witnesses in the case are not in accord on the exact details of the affair, which culminated in a blow by the plaintiff in error that knocked down and broke the nose of a baseball umpire named Kerin, but there is nothing in the record throwing the least doubt on the fact that the blow was given in anger and wholly without legal justification. Beyond this there was evidence for the State quite sufficient to enable a jury to form a further belief that the act was without provocation or. warning and inspired by resentment at a decision unpopular among the partisans of one baseball team in a match just played.\nThe penalty was by no means unduly severe for the offense.\nCounsel for the People claim that the bill of exceptions in the case cannot be considered. They say that it was not \u201capproved\u201d within the time allowed by law. It was \u201ctendered\u201d in time and we are of the opinion expressed by the Branch Appellate Court of this District in Banker v. Miller, 148 Ill. App. 182, that this is sufficient.\nBut the objections urged by plaintiff in error to the judgment are not forceful to our mind. The information we deem sufficient. Assault and battery is sufficiently charged, and so is unlawfulness. The use of the word \u201cunlawful\u201d is not necessary.\nThere were no material errors in the rulings of the court on evidence or in the instructions.\nThe conviction seems to us to have been justifiable and the penalty light, and the judgment is affirmed.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Brown"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "James T. Brady and George W. Plummer, for plaintiff in error.",
      "John E. W. Wayman and John L. Hopkins, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Robert E. Cantwell, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 15,221.\n1. Appeals and errors\u2014when hill of exceptions may he considered. A bill of exceptions in the Municipal Court if tendered within the statutory time may be considered on review although not approved until after such time.\n2. Assault and battery-\u2014when indictment sufficient. An indictment charging assault and battery may be sufficient without the use of the word \u201cunlawful.\u201d\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Stephen A. Poster, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1909.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 13, 1911.\nJames T. Brady and George W. Plummer, for plaintiff in error.\nJohn E. W. Wayman and John L. Hopkins, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0652-01",
  "first_page_order": 674,
  "last_page_order": 675
}