{
  "id": 2892752,
  "name": "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Joseph Betti, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "City of Chicago v. Betti",
  "decision_date": "1915-03-23",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 20,402",
  "first_page": "87",
  "last_page": "88",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "192 Ill. App. 87"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 139,
    "char_count": 1746,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.525,
    "sha256": "c5f65865985d13500571639c8ec241f8622d83d3342815db6015d813adfc80a3",
    "simhash": "1:8f79c615a08b20bc",
    "word_count": 300
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:32:59.384140+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Joseph Betti, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Cairoli Gigliotti, for plaintiff in error.",
      "John W. Beckwith and Albert J. W. Appell, for defendant in error; Ulysses S. Schwartz, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Joseph Betti, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 20,402.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh J. Keabjsts, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1914.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed March 23, 1915.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 26 \u2014when record on writ of error insufficient. \u201cStatement of facts\u201d examined and held insufficient.\n2. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 26*\u2014when abstract of evidence necessary on writ of error. On a writ of error to the Municipal Court of Chicago, the evidence sought to be preserved should be abstracted.\n3. Appeal and error, \u00a7 365*\u2014when point not raised below not reviewed,. On a writ of error, a question as to the passage of an ordinance not raised below will not be reviewed.\n4. Evidence, \u00a7 224*\u2014when witness\u2019 testimony as to his age not hearsay. The testimony of a witness as to his age is not incompetent as hearsay.\n5. Criminal law, \u00a7 160*\u2014when production of evidence not required. On a suit for a penalty for selling tobacco to minors, the production of the tobacco sold is not required.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by the City of Chicago, plaintiff, against Joseph Betti, defendant, to recover a penalty for the violation of a city ordinance prohibiting the sale of tobacco to minors.\nTo reverse a judgment for plaintiff, defendant sues out this writ of error.\nCairoli Gigliotti, for plaintiff in error.\nJohn W. Beckwith and Albert J. W. Appell, for defendant in error; Ulysses S. Schwartz, of counsel.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0087-01",
  "first_page_order": 111,
  "last_page_order": 112
}