{
  "id": 5432645,
  "name": "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. George Rupp, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Rupp",
  "decision_date": "1920-10-06",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 25,322",
  "first_page": "269",
  "last_page": "271",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "219 Ill. App. 269"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "1916 Stat. 3580",
      "category": "laws:leg_session",
      "reporter": "Stat.",
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "(1)"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 278,
    "char_count": 4615,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.552,
    "sha256": "9df69218c7081081fc7367743d7af983edf12f9c20baf4e1f60f895a459fdb4f",
    "simhash": "1:82d7c16dc4efd3f3",
    "word_count": 802
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:18:36.383317+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. George Rupp, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Thomson\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThe information filed in this case alleges that the defendant Rupp, being the father of Elizabeth Kolkan, an infant child, \u201c.did neglect to give said child proper parental care, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided.\u201d After hearing, the court found the defendant guilty in manner as charged in the information and entered an order releasing him upon probation for the period of one year upon certain conditions, one of which was that he pay to the clerk of the court for the use of the mother of the child in question, $4 per week for the period of probation. Later, on motion of the People, by the State\u2019s Attorney, that order was vacated and set aside and a new order was entered \u201cthat the defendant pay to the clerk of this court, for the use of Helen Kolkan (the mother of the child), $4.00 on Saturday of each week for the support of Elizabeth Kolkan.\u201d This writ of error was sued out to reverse that order.\nThe statute [Callaghan\u2019s 1916 Stat. 3580(1)] provides that \u2018 any parent, legal guardian or person having the custody of * * *. a female under the age of 18 years, who shall knowingly or wilfully cause, aid or encourage such person to be or become a dependent and neglected child * * * shall be deemed guilty of the crime of contributing to the dependency and neglect of children and on conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not more than $200.00 or by imprisonment in the County jail # * * for not more than one year or both by such fine and imprisonment.\u201d There follows a provision for probation of one year upon condition that the defendant \u2018 \u2018 shall provide and care for such neglected and dependent child in such manner as to prevent a continuance or repetition of such state of dependency and. neglect or as otherwise may be directed by the court,\u201d and it is further provided that if the defendant violates any of the conditions of the parol during the year, the court \u201cmay forthwith revoke the order and sentence him under the original conviction. Unless so sentenced, the defendant shall, at the end of the year, be discharged.\u201d\nThe defendant was not the husband of the mother of the child, which was born to her about a month after she procured a divorce on the ground of desertion. Even if the statute could be applied to the defendant, the order was erroneous as it imposed neither a fine nor imprisonment and clearly is not such an order as the statute provides for.\nBut we are further of the opinion that this statute cannot be applied to the father of an illegitimate child, \u2014assuming this child to be such. He does not have the custody of the child,\u2014at least such is not shown to have been the case here,\u2014and he is not entitled to such custody, as a matter of right, under the law, nor is he the child\u2019s \u201clegal guardian.\u201d In our opinion the word \u201cparent\u201d in the statute means the legal parent.\nIt should further be noted that the information, in charging that the defendant \u201cdid neglect to give said child proper parental care,\u201d fails to allege any crime or offense under the statute.\nFor the reasons referred to, the judgment of the municipal court is reversed.\nReversed.\nTaylor, P. J. and O \u2019Connor, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Thomson"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "William Slack, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Maclay Hoyne, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. George Rupp, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 25,322.\n1. Criminal law, $ 372 \u2014when judgment is erroneous. Upon conviction of the charge of contributing to the dependency and neglect of children under the statute (J. & A. If 3580), an order imposing neither a fine nor imprisonment is erroneous.\n2. Infants, \u00a7 4*\u2014what \u201cparent\u201d is responsible for support of neglected child. The word \u201cparent\u201d in the statute punishing contributing to the dependency and neglect of children [Callaghan\u2019s 1916 Stat. If 3586(1)] means the legal parent and cannot be applied to the father of an illegitimate child.\n3. Indictment and information, \u00a7 22*\u2014when information as to neglect of child is insufficient. An information charging that the defendant \u201cdid neglect to give said child proper parental care\u201d fails to allege any crime under statute defining and punishing the offense of contributing to the dependency and neglect of children [Callaghan\u2019s 1916 Stat. f 3580(1)].\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. William N. Gbmmill, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.\nReversed.\nOpinion filed October 6, 1920.\nWilliam Slack, for plaintiff in error.\nMaclay Hoyne, for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols, XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0269-01",
  "first_page_order": 295,
  "last_page_order": 297
}