{
  "id": 2822768,
  "name": "Bill Board Publishing Company, Appellant, v. F. C. McCarahan, Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "Bill Board Publishing Co. v. McCarahan",
  "decision_date": "1913-05-26",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 17,253",
  "first_page": "542",
  "last_page": "544",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "180 Ill. App. 542"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "111 Ill. 479",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "26 Ill. 531",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5244579
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/26/0531-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "136 Ill. 135",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2991660
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/136/0135-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 185,
    "char_count": 2673,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.528,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.08480687484096563
    },
    "sha256": "6e37739c684e9ddf1e7e552be6ef71947f8b1a17ea95a9d93b2a0235bc5a2a8f",
    "simhash": "1:bdd7c87bb07361d4",
    "word_count": 458
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:28:40.413930+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Bill Board Publishing Company, Appellant, v. F. C. McCarahan, Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Brown\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThis is an appeal from the order of December 21, 1910, by the Circuit Court of Coolc county, described in the statement prefixed to the opinion in No. 17,366, ante, p. 525, which sustained a demurrer to and dismissed at the costs of petitioner a petition for a rule on McCarahan to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt \u201cin disregarding and violating the injunction\u201d ordered by the said Circuit Court on May 12, 1908.\nIt will be apparent from what we have said in the opinions in causes Nos. 17,355, and 17,313, in this court, that we must hold that the demurrer was properly sustained and the rule denied.\nLong before the petition for the rule was filed and long before the action complained of as contempt was taken, the injunction had ceased to exist by the dismissal of the bil.1 on which it was founded. There could be, therefore, no contempt in disregarding it. In Thomson v. McCormick, 136 Ill. 135, it was held that even where the bill was not as a whole dismissed, the action of the court in sustaining demurrers to portions of the bill and thus \u201cdismissing out of the case all the charges in the bill on which the injunction was based,\u201d was a dissolution of the injunction. Although the order dismissing the bill was erroneous, it was not, as we have decided, a nullity.\" Nor could a writ of error, even though made a supersedeas, revive it. Blount v. Tomlin, 26 Ill. 531; Jenkins v. International Bank, 111 Ill. 479. The order of the Circuit Court of December 21, 1910, sustaining the demurrer of McCarahan to the amended petition of the Bill Board Publishing Company for a rule on him to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt and dismissing the petition at petitioner\u2019s costs is affirmed.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Brown"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Simmons, Mitchell & Irving, for appellant.",
      "J. S. McClure, for appellee; William Street, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Bill Board Publishing Company, Appellant, v. F. C. McCarahan, Appellee.\nGen. No. 17,253.\n1. Contempt\u2014violation of injunction. After the bill upon which an interlocutory injunction is based has been dismissed defendant cannot be punished for contempt in disregarding the injunction, although the order of dismissal was erroneous.\n2. Injunctions\u2014contempt. Although a writ of error has been sued out to review an order dismissing a bill upon which an interlocutory injunction is based, and has been made a supersedeas, the injunction is not revived and disobedience thereto cannot be punished as contempt.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Adelob J. Petit, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1913.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 26, 1913.\nSimmons, Mitchell & Irving, for appellant.\nJ. S. McClure, for appellee; William Street, of counsel."
  },
  "file_name": "0542-01",
  "first_page_order": 560,
  "last_page_order": 562
}