{
  "id": 2759377,
  "name": "William H. Benvie, Defendant in Error, v. Chicago Stock Yards & Transit Co., Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Benvie v. Chicago Stock Yards & Transit Co.",
  "decision_date": "1912-10-08",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 17,808",
  "first_page": "305",
  "last_page": "306",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "174 Ill. App. 305"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 91,
    "char_count": 1130,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.517,
    "sha256": "4fb2afaf997756db45518193c0261fec257296b622611917de0b2915a658b6d4",
    "simhash": "1:576330dd5143f8bc",
    "word_count": 181
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:56:54.106977+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William H. Benvie, Defendant in Error, v. Chicago Stock Yards & Transit Co., Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Clark\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nJudgment was obtained by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error in the Municipal Court, which we are asked to reverse for the reasons, as alleged, that improper evidence was admitted and proper evidence excluded, and that the finding was excessive.\nNo bill of exceptions, however, appears in the record, and, consequently, no question is preserved for review by the assignments of error, which relate wholly to questions of evidence.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Clark"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Josiah Burnham, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Mark J. Sullivan, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William H. Benvie, Defendant in Error, v. Chicago Stock Yards & Transit Co., Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 17,808.\nAppeals and ebrobs\u2014when hill of exceptions is necessary to review. Where no bill of exceptions appears in the record, no question is preserved for review by assignments of error relating wholly to questions of evidence.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Horr. Geokge J. Cowing, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1911.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed October 8, 1912.\nJosiah Burnham, for plaintiff in error.\nMark J. Sullivan, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0305-01",
  "first_page_order": 323,
  "last_page_order": 324
}