{
  "id": 880113,
  "name": "Moore-Bond Company, Defendant in Error, v. The Attractograph Company, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Moore-Bond Co. v. Attractograph Co.",
  "decision_date": "1913-06-30",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 16,569",
  "first_page": "513",
  "last_page": "514",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "181 Ill. App. 513"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 129,
    "char_count": 1819,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.519,
    "sha256": "7413790f7884ac42ee900b2d1a64f789502fdf2a441237f6016e1146115009f9",
    "simhash": "1:9b7f1657809a9d5e",
    "word_count": 301
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:28:55.892129+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Moore-Bond Company, Defendant in Error, v. The Attractograph Company, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Baker\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThe evidence in this case is not before us.\nThe objection that the placita does not show a properly constituted court is cured by the additional placita which shows that the judge who presided at the trial was the county judge of Schuyler county and sat in the Municipal Court at the request of the judges of that court.\nThe contention that the record shows no judgment is without merit. The judgment order contained some words which have no proper place in the order. Rejecting such words as surplusage, there is left a judgment in proper form.\nThe statute does not require the Municipal Court to have a stenographer present at trials in that court to take notes of the evidence.\nThat the Municipal Court Act is constitutional is settled by repeated decisions of the Supreme Court.\nThe judgment is affirmed.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Baker"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "5. M. Meek and John P. McDonald, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Will C. Moody, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Moore-Bond Company, Defendant in Error, v. The Attractograph Company, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 16,569.\n1. Appeals and errors\u2014where plaeita is defective. A plaeita which does not show a properly constituted court is cured by an additional plaeita showing the appointment of the trial judge.\n2. Appeals and eeeoes\u2014where judgment order contains surplus words. A judgment order is sustained where after rejecting improper words as surplusage a judgment is left in proper form.\n3. Municipal court\u2014stenographer. The statute does not require ' stenographer at trials in the municipal court.\n4. Constitutional law\u2014Municipal Court Act. The Municipal Court Act is constitutional.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. William H. Dieterich, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the October term, 1911.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed June 30, 1913.\n5. M. Meek and John P. McDonald, for plaintiff in error.\nWill C. Moody, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0513-01",
  "first_page_order": 539,
  "last_page_order": 540
}