{
  "id": 2969903,
  "name": "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Albert Johnson, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "City of Chicago v. Johnson",
  "decision_date": "1916-04-28",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 21,569",
  "first_page": "325",
  "last_page": "326",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "199 Ill. App. 325"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 92,
    "char_count": 982,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.546,
    "sha256": "69c27d7f431bf7e49dc64c60be6da11ac68736a5d8f5ca100c704d18af9d9c10",
    "simhash": "1:c3194c3f8b4f9cf8",
    "word_count": 164
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:51:30.955611+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Albert Johnson, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Barnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Barnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Charles E. Erbstein and Charles P. E. Macaulay, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Samuel A. Ettelson and Harry B. Miller, for defendant in error; Daniel Webster, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Albert Johnson, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 21,569.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. William N. Gemmill, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1915.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed April 28, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nComplaint by City of Chicago, plaintiff, against Albert Johnson, defendant. The same questions are involved as are decided in the opinion filed.in Gen. No. 21,568, City of Chicago v. Baker, ante, p. 323.\nThe complaint is in the same language, based on the same city ordinance, and supported by the same character of proof, as held in the Baker case, supra, to be insufficient to sustain a judgment of conviction.\nCharles E. Erbstein and Charles P. E. Macaulay, for plaintiff in error.\nSamuel A. Ettelson and Harry B. Miller, for defendant in error; Daniel Webster, of counsel."
  },
  "file_name": "0325-01",
  "first_page_order": 347,
  "last_page_order": 348
}