{
  "id": 4950237,
  "name": "W. C. Goudy v. The City of Lake View",
  "name_abbreviation": "Goudy v. City of Lake View",
  "decision_date": "1888-12-07",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "505",
  "last_page": "506",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "27 Ill. App. 505"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 126,
    "char_count": 1577,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.486,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.138363859351185e-08,
      "percentile": 0.47218138972581025
    },
    "sha256": "91ff9a5a9637942b7a33dcd67e6cbbaa7aebe0e6bd328180f99169944fdf440c",
    "simhash": "1:4e365ae9874524b8",
    "word_count": 281
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:38:40.638408+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "W. C. Goudy v. The City of Lake View."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nBriefs for appellant were filed in this case on October 6, 18S8, after they were due, according to the terms of the rule of court. On October 10th the case was reached for argument in its regular order on call of the calendar, and on that day (no oral argument being made and no briefs filed by appellee) a motion was made by appellee to strike appellant\u2019s brief from the files for non-compliance with the rule, and to affirm the judgment, which motion was sustained by order heretofore entered. A motion being now made to set aside that order, we have re-examined the question and find that, according to the former\" practice of the court, a motion to strike appellant\u2019s briefs from the files should he made before the case is reached for argument, if they were filed a sufficient time before then to permit the motion t\u00f3 be made. What correction may be necessary to prevent abuses that may arise out of the practice may be matters for future consideration. The former order is set aside and appellee will have fifteen days in which to file briefs.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. A. W. Green, for appellant.",
      "Mr. H. II. Anderson, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "W. C. Goudy v. The City of Lake View.\nPractice \u2014 Delay in Filing Briefs \u2014 Affirmance\u2014Motion to Set Order Aside.\nUpon the failure of appellant to file his briefs within the time required by the rule of this court, the motion to strike such briefs from the files and affirm the judgment should be made, if practicable, before the case is reached for argument.\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Joseph E. Gary, Judge, presiding.\nMr. A. W. Green, for appellant.\nMr. H. II. Anderson, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0505-01",
  "first_page_order": 501,
  "last_page_order": 502
}