{
  "id": 856721,
  "name": "John Aff v. John P. Hopkins, Mayor, etc.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Aff v. Hopkins",
  "decision_date": "1895-02-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "529",
  "last_page": "530",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "57 Ill. App. 529"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "114 Ill. 185",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2869294
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/114/0185-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "50 Ill. App. 93",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5118821
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/50/0093-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "46 Ill. App. 306",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5145313
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/46/0306-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 213,
    "char_count": 2669,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.469,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.150581758606138e-07,
      "percentile": 0.9114809396223487
    },
    "sha256": "28240718659c0015156a767773a5026fa8f2c01d9f9923ed7415ad46b956ad16",
    "simhash": "1:46b12a21c40900c4",
    "word_count": 464
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:02:41.767696+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "John Aff v. John P. Hopkins, Mayor, etc."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nSeptember 21, 1893, the appellant filed a petition for a mandamus to compel the late Carter H. Harrison, whose tragic death shocked the nation as that of Carnot did the world, then mayor of the city of Chicago, to issue a dram-shop license for a term to end December, 1893.\nApril 28, 1894, by stipulation, John P. Hopkins, successor as mayor, was substituted as defendant or respondent, and the prayer changed to apply to a term to end before the record in this case was filed in this court.\nUnder the constitution and statutes of this State, this court is authorized to decide many questions of law in real controversies between parties as to their existing rights; but not, as we hold, to instruct or advise as to the law applicable to supposititious cases. What is really sought on this appeal is not a decision of what the law was as to dramshop licenses in 1893 and 1894, but what it is to be in 1895 or thereafter. The court does not. consider such questions. Loven v. People, 46 Ill. App. 306; Washburn v. People, 50 Ill. App. 93.\nOn demurrer the court dismissed the petition. To reverse the judgment would be, if of any effect at all, to direct the court to issue the mandamus.\n\u201c It is a well recognized principle that courts, in exercising their jurisdiction in mandamus, will not award the peremptory writ where the right sought to be enforced is or has become a mere abstract right, the enforcement of which, by reason of some change of circumstances since the commencement of the suit, can be of no substantial or practical benefit to the petitioner.\u201d Gormley v. Day, 114 Ill. 185. All of which means that we won\u2019t hold a moot court. Bartemeyer v. Iowa, 18 Wallace 129.\nIf the appellant wants to keep a dramshop hereafter, his license must be upon an application and terms not alluded to in this record. The appeal is dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Bobbins S. Mott, attorney for appellant.",
      "George A. Trude, attorney for appellee; George A. Du-put, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "John Aff v. John P. Hopkins, Mayor, etc.\n1. Appellate Court Practice\u2014Supposititious Cases.\u2014The Appellate Court is not authorized to consider supposititious cases.\n2. Mandamus\u2014The Writ\u2014When Not to be Issued.\u2014A peremptory writ of mandamus will not be awarded where the right sought to be enforced is a mere abstract right, the enforcement of which, by reason of some change of circumstances since the commencement of the suit, can be of no substantial or practical benefit to the petitioner.\nMemorandum.\u2014Mandamus. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. John Gibbons, Judge, presiding.\nAppeal dismissed in this court.\nOpinion filed February 12, 1895.\nBobbins S. Mott, attorney for appellant.\nGeorge A. Trude, attorney for appellee; George A. Du-put, of counsel."
  },
  "file_name": "0529-01",
  "first_page_order": 525,
  "last_page_order": 526
}