{
  "id": 5354814,
  "name": "Mississippi Lumber Company v. John K. Joice et al.; Charles F. Thompson et al., Appellees, v. John K. Joice et al., Appellants",
  "name_abbreviation": "Mississippi Lumber Co. v. Joice",
  "decision_date": "1912-12-30",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 15,957",
  "first_page": "108",
  "last_page": "109",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "176 Ill. App. 108"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 149,
    "char_count": 1820,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.519,
    "sha256": "7744b0681a5ce42c399f65ed351c441d86f96c815540c502029b3a3360f22464",
    "simhash": "1:5a4ba70b193abeac",
    "word_count": 300
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:47:28.669055+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Mississippi Lumber Company v. John K. Joice et al. Charles F. Thompson et al., Appellees, v. John K. Joice et al., Appellants."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Smith\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThe decree in the above-entitled cause is reviewed and as modified affirmed in Mississippi Lumber Co. v. Joice, post, 110, in an opinion filed this date, to which we refer for a more detailed statement of the case and the issues involved. The said decree was in part as follows; \u201cThat the cross-bill herein is not germane to the original bill, and is without equity, and that the same should be and is dismissed for want of equity.\u201d The cross-complainants bring this appeal to reverse the said decree only as to the dismissing of the said cross-bill. By the cross-bill the cross-complainants sought to recover individually the secret profit claimed to have been made by Joice, Pope and Pate in the transaction in question; but it is stated by them that if this court affirms the decree finding that the Mississippi Lumber Company is entitled to the relief therein ordered, it is not their desire to urge the reversal here sought.. However, we think that the cross-bill was properly dismissed as not germane to the original bill, and the decree as here appealed from is affirmed.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Smith"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Archibald Cattell, for appellants.",
      "Charles E. Pope and D. A. Clithero, for appellees; John S. Miller, of counsel.",
      "Defress, Buckingham, Ritter & Campbell, for Mississippi Lumber Company."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Mississippi Lumber Company v. John K. Joice et al. Charles F. Thompson et al., Appellees, v. John K. Joice et al., Appellants.\nGen. No. 15,957.\nEquity\u2014cross-bill. A cross-bill is properly dismissed where not germane to the original bill.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. George A. Carpenter, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1909.\nCertiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed December 30, 1912.\nArchibald Cattell, for appellants.\nCharles E. Pope and D. A. Clithero, for appellees; John S. Miller, of counsel.\nDefress, Buckingham, Ritter & Campbell, for Mississippi Lumber Company."
  },
  "file_name": "0108-01",
  "first_page_order": 138,
  "last_page_order": 139
}