{
  "id": 5404847,
  "name": "Samuel H. Thompson, Plaintiff in Error, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Thompson v. Chicago City Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1917-05-01",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,142",
  "first_page": "471",
  "last_page": "472",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "205 Ill. App. 471"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 153,
    "char_count": 1801,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.57,
    "sha256": "0084cee6306ed5f519a175d616cccd87f8829e46961a2038eca3028b34730000",
    "simhash": "1:d17b8931682e127c",
    "word_count": 313
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:46:37.056812+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Samuel H. Thompson, Plaintiff in Error, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McGoorty\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n3. Appeal and error, \u00a7 760*\u2014when affidavits are part of record. Affidavits are a part of the record only when they are brought into it by a bill of exceptions, and they are not made a part of the record merely by being copied into the record by the clerk and certified by him.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McGoorty"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Dillard B. Baker, for plaintiff in error.",
      "J. R. Guilliams and Frank L. Kriete, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Samuel H. Thompson, Plaintiff in Error, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Defendant in Error.\nGen. No. 22,142.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Appeal and ebbob,- \u00a7 1751 \u2014when judgment will be affirmed because of lack; of bill of exceptions. Where on an\u2019 appeal there was no hill of exceptions in the record, and the points relied upon were predicated upon recitals in the clerk\u2019s transcript of a motion for a new trial and affidavits in support thereof, which upon motion had been stricken from the record because such recitals were not properly a part thereof, held that there being nothing before the court for determination, the judgment of the lower court would be affirmed.\n2. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 800*\u2014what must be preserved by bill of exceptions. A motion for new trial and the rulings of the court thereon can only be preserved in the record by a bill of exceptions.\nError to the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. William B. Scholfield, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 1, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Samuel H. Thompson, plaintiff, against the Chicago City Railway Company, defendant. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff brings error.\nDillard B. Baker, for plaintiff in error.\nJ. R. Guilliams and Frank L. Kriete, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI (o XV, arid Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number,"
  },
  "file_name": "0471-01",
  "first_page_order": 499,
  "last_page_order": 500
}