{
  "id": 4763266,
  "name": "William J. Brownell v. Elizabeth Baker",
  "name_abbreviation": "Brownell v. Baker",
  "decision_date": "1880-01-22",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "571",
  "last_page": "572",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "5 Ill. App. 571"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 124,
    "char_count": 1748,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.504,
    "sha256": "d0eb871e11d21a44ae422e1704bb6564dd8ab837eff4b3bfa179a60d050b94a7",
    "simhash": "1:87411052c94fab3b",
    "word_count": 309
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:37:29.512051+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William J. Brownell v. Elizabeth Baker."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThis is a motion by appellant for an' appeal from the order of this court, affirming the decree of the court below to the Supreme Court.\nIn support of the motion, appellant alleges two grounds. 1st, that the amount involved in the case exceeds one thousand dollars.\n2d. That the questions of law presented are of such importance, that they should be passed upon by the Supreme Court.'\nWe do not think the record in this cause shows that the amount involved exceeds one thousand dollars.\nAppellant, however, presents an affidavit in which it is stated by the affiant, that \u201cthe sum or value.in controversy in the case exceeds one thousand dollars.\u201d\nWe cannot regard this affidavit in determining this question.\nIn order to entitle the appellant to an appeal, it must appear by the record that it is a case where an appeal is given by law. The court must determine the question by the record, and not by extrinsic proofs.\nWe are also of opinion that the case does not involve any question of law of sufficient importance to justify us in granting an appeal for that reason.\nThe motion is denied.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. B. D. Lucas, for appellant.",
      "Messrs. Williams, Burr & Capen, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William J. Brownell v. Elizabeth Baker.\nPractice\u2014Appeal to supreme court.\u2014In order to entitle a party to an appeal from this court to the Supreme Court, it must appear by the record that it is a case where an appeal is given by law. The court must determine what is the amount in controversy by the record, and not by extrinsic proof. The affidavit of a party that the amount involved is more than one thousand dollars cannot be considered.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of McLean county; the Hon. Owen T. Reeves, Judge, presiding.\nOpinion filed January 22, 1880.\nMr. B. D. Lucas, for appellant.\nMessrs. Williams, Burr & Capen, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0571-01",
  "first_page_order": 577,
  "last_page_order": 578
}