{
  "id": 2922524,
  "name": "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Edward Walsh, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "City of Chicago v. Walsh",
  "decision_date": "1917-06-27",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,146",
  "first_page": "50",
  "last_page": "51",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "207 Ill. App. 50"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 170,
    "char_count": 2221,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.583,
    "sha256": "d81eaa3c54b0d3ff7a73e81e1cca7f0ab5551fa94421ed8ca217cb0d7bc2a45d",
    "simhash": "1:027b523dc16c80fa",
    "word_count": 362
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:52:34.192092+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Edward Walsh, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Goodwin\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Municipal corporations, \u00a7 864 \u2014 when evidence sufficient to sustain conviction for violation of gambling ordinance. On a prosecution for violation of the Chicago Code of 1911, sec. 982, in reference to gambling, evidence held to support a judgment against defendant.\n3. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 14* \u2014 what judicially noticed by. The Municipal Court of Chicago takes judicial notice of the ordinances of the City of Chicago.\n4. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 28* \u2014 when ordinance must be certified. The trial judge, in an action in the Municipal Court of Chicago, is required, upon the request of the party appealing, to certify the ordinance or ordinances material to the issues.\n5. Municipal Court of Chicago, \u00a7 29* \u2014 when presumed that complaint donformed to ordinance. On an appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Municipal Court of Chicago, where the ordinance material to the issue is not certified by the trial court, every presumption that the complaint thereunder conformed to the ordinance will be indulged in favor of the judgment.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Goodwin"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Henry M. Seligman, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Harry B. Miller, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Edward Walsh, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 22,146.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Evidence \u2014 what judicially noticed. The court will take judicial notice, as a fact of common knowledge, that the automatic' telephone is one conducted without the assistance of an operator, and that conversation over such a line cannot, by accident or otherwise, be heard over any other line in the system.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Sheridan E. Ebt, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at,\nthe March term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed June 27, 1917.\nRehearing denied July 13, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nProsecution by the City of Chicago, plaintiff, against Edward Walsh, defendant, for violation of Chicago Code of 1911, sec. 982. To reverse a judgment against him for a penalty, defendant 'prosecutes this writ of error.\nHenry M. Seligman, for plaintiff in error.\nHarry B. Miller, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0050-01",
  "first_page_order": 76,
  "last_page_order": 77
}