{
  "id": 2974409,
  "name": "Albert W. Rudnick, Administrator, Appellee, v. City of Chicago, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Rudnick v. City of Chicago",
  "decision_date": "1916-05-01",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 21,985",
  "first_page": "375",
  "last_page": "375",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "199 Ill. App. 375"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "198 Ill. App. 474",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2857922
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/198/0474-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 135,
    "char_count": 1330,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.573,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.08635889582751735
    },
    "sha256": "7f98bb897e0ab2591a4760f8717e10408cdbdec99484f4913dc123e358706991",
    "simhash": "1:c05ce50ddc280650",
    "word_count": 215
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:51:30.955611+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Albert W. Rudnick, Administrator, Appellee, v. City of Chicago, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Baker\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Baker"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Samuel A. Ettelson, for appellant; Edward J. Smejkal, of counsel.",
      "A. D. Gash, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Albert W. Rudnick, Administrator, Appellee, v. City of Chicago, Appellant.\nGen. No. 21,985.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\nMunicipal corpobations, \u00a7 145 \u2014when evidence insufficient to show existence of office. In an action against a city to recover compensation for services alleged to have been performed as meter setter, held, following Rudnick v. City of Chicago, Gen. No. 20,897, 198 Ill. App. 474, that no such office existed.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1916.\nCertiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).\nReversed with judgment of nil capiat.\nOpinion filed May 1, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Albert W. Rudnick, administrator of the estate of James F. Scanned, deceased, plaintiff, against the City of Chicago, defendant, for compensation of the plaintiff\u2019s intestate, who was alleged to be a meter setter in the Department of Public Works of the City of Chicago. From a judgment of $5,069.30 for plaintiff, defendant appeals.\nSamuel A. Ettelson, for appellant; Edward J. Smejkal, of counsel.\nA. D. Gash, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0375-01",
  "first_page_order": 397,
  "last_page_order": 397
}