{
  "id": 5545533,
  "name": "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Brewerton Coal Company, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Brewerton Coal Co.",
  "decision_date": "1929-06-05",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "414",
  "last_page": "416",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "253 Ill. App. 414"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "249 Ill. App. 544",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        3234648
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/249/0544-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "150 Ill. App. 381",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2637835
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/150/0381-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "129 Ill. App. 167",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2525335
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/129/0167-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "100 Ill. App. 5",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2598963
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/100/0005-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "291 Ill. 154",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2422377
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/291/0154-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "269 Ill. 608",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        4801008
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/269/0608-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "307 Ill. 149",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5092066
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/307/0149-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 174,
    "char_count": 2199,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.514,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.370710586428907e-08,
      "percentile": 0.27452971196390213
    },
    "sha256": "e20e3a0b7a21b23acdd3d615adee547d1a3cc6b98f5f2ebe1b62133de4a73606",
    "simhash": "1:85a68f8763ca3ebd",
    "word_count": 400
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:33:35.432153+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. Brewerton Coal Company, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barry\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThe transcript of the record contains no placita. To enable this court to review a cause upon its merits the record must contain a placita. Hardy v. Jones, 307 Ill. 149. The purported judgment of the court below appears in the bill of exceptions and not in the common-law record. The bill of exceptions must not contain the findings and judgment of the court as they are a part of the common-law record and must be found therein. Miller v. Anderson, 269 Ill. 608; People v. Kuhn, 291 Ill. 154.\nA recital of the judgment in the bill of exceptions does not show a judgment in the legal sense of the term and where that is the only evidence in the record that a judgment was entered in the court below, this court is without jurisdiction. O\u2019Donnell v. Quinn, 100 Ill. App. 5; Riva v. City of Spring Valley, 129 Ill. App. 167; Ashmore v. Skene Lead Co., 150 Ill. App. 381.\nThe purported bill of exceptions is included in the transcript of the record. . It shows that the case was tried and judgment entered on September 22,1928, and 60 days were allowed for the filing of the bill of exceptions. \u25a0 The certificate of the trial judge is to the effect that the bill of exceptions was presented to him and signed on December 29, 1928, long after the time for filing the same had expired. There is nothing in the record to show that the time was extended by the trial court. If a bill of exceptions is not presented within the time originally fixed, or within the time as \u2022 extended, the judge of the trial, court has no power or authority to sign and settle, the same. Davis v. Wirth, 249 Ill. App. 544. In the state of the record the bill of exceptions is not properly \u00e1 part thereof and could not be considered even if we had jurisdiction to pass upon the merits of the case.\nFor the reasons aforesaid the writ of error is dismissed.\nWrit of error dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barry"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "West & Eckhart, for plaintiff in error; William M. Klein and Lewis O. Jesseph, of counsel.",
      "Marion M. Hart, State\u2019s Attorney, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Brewerton Coal Company, Plaintiff in Error.\nOpinion filed June 5, 1929.\nWest & Eckhart, for plaintiff in error; William M. Klein and Lewis O. Jesseph, of counsel.\nMarion M. Hart, State\u2019s Attorney, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0414-01",
  "first_page_order": 438,
  "last_page_order": 440
}