{
  "id": 2929833,
  "name": "Alma Heizer et al., Defendants in Error, v. John W. Heizer, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Heizer v. Heizer",
  "decision_date": "1917-07-02",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,051",
  "first_page": "126",
  "last_page": "127",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "207 Ill. App. 126"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 156,
    "char_count": 1766,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.596,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.02847802651471e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3736385789287329
    },
    "sha256": "839e94401f050d39b8629128eae3c0852d763a6da31abede12ad0ae549dca108",
    "simhash": "1:8d5ecb93492ab1fc",
    "word_count": 301
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:52:34.192092+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Alma Heizer et al., Defendants in Error, v. John W. Heizer, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "G. A. Buresh and Otto Wadewitz, for plaintiff in error.",
      "F. A. Woodbury, for defendants in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Alma Heizer et al., Defendants in Error, v. John W. Heizer, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 23,051.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Charles M. Thomson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1917.\nReversed and remanded with directions.\nOpinion filed July 2, 1917.\nRehearing denied July 16, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nBill for divorce by Alma Heizer, complainant, against John W. Heizer, defendant. By an order entered therein defendant was directed to pay $100 as solicitors\u2019 fees to F. A. Woodbnrv and Otto Schusterman, complainant\u2019s solicitors, for services in defending a writ of error in the Appellate Court in Reiser v. Reiser, 204 111. App. 200, which was sued out to reverse the order for alimony made in the divorce suit, in which, prior thereto, a decree of divorce had been entered. To reverse the order allowing solicitors'\u2019 fees, defendant prosecutes this writ of error.\nG. A. Buresh and Otto Wadewitz, for plaintiff in error.\nF. A. Woodbury, for defendants in error.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Divorce, \u00a7 142 \u2014 what does not affect allowance of solicitors\u2019 fee for defending decree, on review. The fact that the measure adopted by the trial court to ascertain the amount of alimony was held erroneous on appeal does not deprive that court of jurisdiction to allow to a wife solicitors\u2019 fees to defend on review the integrity of the alimony decreed.\n2. Divorce, \u00a7 143* \u2014 who may h,ave allowance of solicitors\u2019 fees. The allowance of solicitors\u2019 fees in a divorce suit must be made to the wife and not to her solicitors.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0126-01",
  "first_page_order": 152,
  "last_page_order": 153
}