{
  "id": 2903733,
  "name": "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Paul Tomanicka, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "City of Chicago v. Tomanicka",
  "decision_date": "1914-10-08",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 19,426",
  "first_page": "118",
  "last_page": "119",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "189 Ill. App. 118"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 131,
    "char_count": 1585,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.533,
    "sha256": "8121498fe822c1b360964b1c0bd33cf9cfccc460f6233c17f152635cdcdf15c2",
    "simhash": "1:57d74d1d73af70bc",
    "word_count": 262
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:38:10.053698+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Paul Tomanicka, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Scanlan\ndelivered the opinion of the court. \u2022",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Scanlan"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "John C. Trainor, for plaintiff in error.",
      "William H. Sexton and James S. McInerney, for defendant in error; Albert J. W. Appell, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Paul Tomanicka, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 19,426.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John J. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1913.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed October 8, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nComplaint filed in the Municipal Court of Chicago-by the City of Chicago, charging Paul Tomanicka with a violation of section 2012 of the Municipal Code, commonly known as the \u2018\u2018disorderly conduct section.\u201d Defendant waived a trial by jury, and the court found the-defendant guilty and assessed a fine in the sum of one dollar. To reverse a judgment entered on the finding, defendant prosecutes a writ of error.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nDisorderly conduct, \u00a7 1 \u2014when finding of guilty sustained by the evidence. On a complaint charging the defendant with disorderly conduct in violation of a city ordinance, held that plaintiff\u2019s evidence made out a prima facie case and that a finding of guilty was not manifestly against the weight of the evidence.\nDefendant urged, as ground for reversal that the evidence of plaintiff, even if true, did not justify the finding of guilty, and that the finding was manifestly against the weight of the evidence.\nJohn C. Trainor, for plaintiff in error.\nWilliam H. Sexton and James S. McInerney, for defendant in error; Albert J. W. Appell, of counsel.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and - Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0118-01",
  "first_page_order": 144,
  "last_page_order": 145
}
