{
  "id": 880165,
  "name": "Ed. Finch, Appellee, v. J. W. McIntosh, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Finch v. McIntosh",
  "decision_date": "1913-04-18",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "86",
  "last_page": "88",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "181 Ill. App. 86"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "216 Ill. 561",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "171 Ill. App. 120",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2771918
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/171/0120-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 159,
    "char_count": 2486,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.537,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.031052775663754913
    },
    "sha256": "d7eb8758220d74500cf65bf618b7b013ef463b1f6850936b84d04c46811cafb5",
    "simhash": "1:84579e2c78fd3ffa",
    "word_count": 434
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:28:55.892129+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Ed. Finch, Appellee, v. J. W. McIntosh, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Creighton\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThis is an appeal prosecuted from the county court of McDonough county, asking to have reviewed a judgment in favor of the appellee in the sum of $168.50.\nThe only legal question involved in the record is the construction of a certain contract made hy appellee with appellant to bore a well upon the premises of appellant.\nThis same case, in all respects, was passed upon by this court and an opinion filed December 13, 1911 (Finch v. McIntosh, 171 Ill. App. 120), and the identical questions sought to be raised by this appeal, were squarely passed upon, and the former judgment reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.\nUpon the cause being redocketed in the trial court, in conformity with the ruling \"of this court, on the former appeal, a new trial was had upon the same facts as presented at the first hearing, and a judgment rendered against the appellant. Thereupon this appeal was perfected.\nThe rule of res adjudicata must be applied in this case.\nIn Penn. Plate Glass Co. v. James H. Rice Co., 216 Ill. 561, the Supreme Court, in discussing this question, said: \u201cThe law is clear that when a case is reversed by an appellate tribunal and remanded for a new trial, the principles announced by the appellate tribunal in its opinion, on a retrial of the case in the court to which the case is remanded and upon an appeal from a judgment rendered upon such remandment, must control if the case presented upon the second trial and appeal is the same case as the case in which the opinion was filed reversing and remanding the case.\u201d\nThe judgment of the county court is affirmed.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Creighton"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Eltihg & Hainlinb, for appellant; Gilbert J. Haihline, of counsel.",
      "Flack & Lawyer, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Ed. Finch, Appellee, v. J. W. McIntosh, Appellant.\n1. Appeals and errors\u2014when former decision res adjudicata. Where on a second appeal the same questions are sought to be raised as were passed on in a former appeal, the former decision is res adjudicata.\n2. Appeals and errors\u2014res adjudicata. Where a case is reversed and remanded for new trial, the principle announced by the appellate tribunal in the opinion must control on a retrial and on an appeal from a judgment rendered on retrial, if the case presented on the second trial is the same.\nAppeal from the County Court of McDonough county; the Hon. Conrad G. Gumbart, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the October term, 1912.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 18, 1913.\nEltihg & Hainlinb, for appellant; Gilbert J. Haihline, of counsel.\nFlack & Lawyer, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0086-01",
  "first_page_order": 112,
  "last_page_order": 114
}