{
  "id": 5185597,
  "name": "La Rena A. Wilson et al. v. The Northwestern Bond and Trust Company",
  "name_abbreviation": "Wilson v. Northwestern Bond & Trust Co.",
  "decision_date": "1896-11-05",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "537",
  "last_page": "538",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "66 Ill. App. 537"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 152,
    "char_count": 1978,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.545,
    "sha256": "84ac72c2fa83dceb901f5a5b335d9a9fd54be6cf6895c42ccbbf2b7d22ef8d41",
    "simhash": "1:b767050932dadd49",
    "word_count": 359
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:02:14.451346+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "La Rena A. Wilson et al. v. The Northwestern Bond and Trust Company."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nWe can do nothing with this case but affirm the decree. The abstract of the supposed \u201c amended supplemental bill of complaint\u201d does not show that the plaintiffs in error were parties to the suit. We take the title of the case from the brief of the defendant in error.\nThe abstract contains no reference to the former pleadings except in stating that such former pleadings were in the case, and -that this bill is by the plaintiffs in error intended \u201cto be in itself a full and complete statement of their whole and only cause of action.\u201d\nBut such a bill \u201c is an addition to the original bill, and becomes part of it, so that the whole bill is to be taken as one amended bill.\u201d 2 Dan. Chy., 1536, note 3.\nIt \u201c must not contradict the statements of the original bill.\u201d Ibid. 1515, note 1. It must be upon the same cause of action as the original. Ibid.\nIf any of these rules are violated a demurrer will hold. Ibid. 1535, note 5. Whether any such objections were the ground upon which the demurrer was sustained, can not be told with only the one bill before the court.\nWhat little is here is very vague and uncertain, but we will not discuhs it.\nThe decree dismissing the cause is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Nathaniel Bacon, attorney for plaintiffs in error.",
      "Wood & Oakley, attorneys for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "La Rena A. Wilson et al. v. The Northwestern Bond and Trust Company.\n1. Equity Practice\u2014Supplemental Bill.\u2014A supplemental bill in chancery is an addition to the original bill, and becomes a part of it. It must not contradict the statements of the original bill, and must be upon the same cause of action so that the whole is to be taken as an amended bill. If any of these rules are violated a demurrer will be sustained to it.\nIn Equity.\u2014Bill for relief. Error to the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Theodore Brentano, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1896.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed November 5, 1896.\nNathaniel Bacon, attorney for plaintiffs in error.\nWood & Oakley, attorneys for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0537-01",
  "first_page_order": 533,
  "last_page_order": 534
}