{
  "id": 880109,
  "name": "Mary Hogue, Appellee, v. Charles Hogue, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hogue v. Hogue",
  "decision_date": "1913-06-30",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 17,553",
  "first_page": "705",
  "last_page": "705",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "181 Ill. App. 705"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "239 Ill. 29",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        849051
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/239/0029-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "66 Ill. App. 582",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5186899
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/66/0582-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "170 Ill. 373",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3181466
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/170/0373-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 113,
    "char_count": 1445,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.57,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.031050072803472325
    },
    "sha256": "e1b4606c869c33da6036eb6de187a1b15afce5557337e943af40178db98d4f7b",
    "simhash": "1:c31ecb25f8050294",
    "word_count": 243
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:28:55.892129+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Mary Hogue, Appellee, v. Charles Hogue, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Baume\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAppellee, Mary Hogue, filed her bill of review in the circuit court against the appellant, Charles Hogue, to set aside and review a former decree of said court, upon the ground of fraud. Appellant demurred to the bill. The demurrer was overruled and appellant having elected to abide his demurrer, the bill was taken as confessed and a decree was entered setting aside said former decree for the purpose of reviewing the same upon a rehearing. Appellant now seeks to prosecute an appeal to this court from the decree setting aside said former decree. The decree sought to be appealed from is not final, but interlocutory merely, and is, therefore, not the subject of appeal. Adamski v. Wieczorek, 170 Ill. 373; affirming 66 Ill. App. 582; Rosenthal v. Board of Education, 239 Ill. 29.\nThe appeal is dismissed.\nAppeal dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Baume"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Lewis Edward Dickinson, for appellant.",
      "No appearance for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Mary Hogue, Appellee, v. Charles Hogue, Appellant.\nGen. No. 17,553.\nAppeals and errors\u2014when decree on a hill of review is interlocutory. A decree on a bill of review setting aside a former decree for the purpose of reviewing the same upon a rehearing is interlocutory and is not the subject of appeal.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1911.\nDismissed.\nOpinion filed June 30, 1913.\nLewis Edward Dickinson, for appellant.\nNo appearance for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0705-01",
  "first_page_order": 731,
  "last_page_order": 731
}