{
  "id": 2895783,
  "name": "Amie I. Adams, Defendant in Error, v. Edward S. Adams, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Adams v. Adams",
  "decision_date": "1915-05-25",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 20,757",
  "first_page": "638",
  "last_page": "639",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "192 Ill. App. 638"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 152,
    "char_count": 1650,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.495,
    "sha256": "0d13f7d9b805c5d24444d8db97a885d0dd5c1a1a3399df99c556846fd587658a",
    "simhash": "1:80208725d20971cc",
    "word_count": 264
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:32:59.384140+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Amie I. Adams, Defendant in Error, v. Edward S. Adams, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Smith\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nDivorce, \u00a7 45 \u2014when evidence sufficient to support decree. Evidence in suit for divorce on ground of habitual drunkenness examined and Held to support a decree for complainant.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Smith"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Haight, Brown & Haight, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Rosenthal & Hamill, for defendant in error; Charles H. Hamill, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Amie I. Adams, Defendant in Error, v. Edward S. Adams, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 20,757.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Denis E. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1914.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 25, 1915.\nStatement of the Case.\nBill for divorce by Amie I. Adams, complainant, against Edward S. Adams, defendant, on the ground of defendant\u2019s habitual drunkenness for the space of more than three years.\nFor complainant there were two witnesses,\u2014herself and her brother-in-law, Dr. Small. The complainant\u2019s testimony was full and circumstantial, covering the last six years of the married life of the parties, and was fully supported by Dr. Small\u2019s evidence, which further showed defendant\u2019s physical and mental condition to be due to alcoholism. The evidence also supported the allegations of the bill as to the faithful performance by complainant of her duties and obligations as wife.\nDefendant, who was personally served, did not enter his appearance, and a decree was rendered against'him by default, to reverse which decree he prosecutes this writ of error.\nHaight, Brown & Haight, for plaintiff in error.\nRosenthal & Hamill, for defendant in error; Charles H. Hamill, of counsel.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0638-01",
  "first_page_order": 662,
  "last_page_order": 663
}