{
  "id": 5203593,
  "name": "Alexander McIntosh and Elizabeth McIntosh v. Denslow Lewis",
  "name_abbreviation": "McIntosh v. Lewis",
  "decision_date": "1897-03-29",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "593",
  "last_page": "593",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "69 Ill. App. 593"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "58 Ill. App. 259",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5081544
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "388"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/58/0259-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "58 Ill. App. 259",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5081544
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "388"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/58/0259-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 152,
    "char_count": 1736,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.523,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.15634811141498983
    },
    "sha256": "735948628e38bd7340baef5b9815937a14281872d24335e97039a439d0ce2b1e",
    "simhash": "1:977d391b7a876d3e",
    "word_count": 291
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:55:23.961114+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Alexander McIntosh and Elizabeth McIntosh v. Denslow Lewis."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion of the Court;\nThis record shows thatMay 5, 1896, in this cause proceedings were had as follows:\n\u201c This cause being called for trial and the defendants failing to prosecute their appeal in this behalf on motion of plaintiff\u2019s attorney it is ordered that said appeal be and the same is hereby dismissed at defendants\u2019 costs for want of prosecution, and that a procedendo do issue herein to the court below. Therefore, it is considered by the court that plaintiff do have and recover of and from the defendants, his costs and charges in this behalf expended and \"have execution therefor.\u201d\nSeptember 18, 1896, the appellants, defendants below,, moved the court to vacate and set aside these proceedings.\nIn all essential particulars the case is like Angus v. Backus, 58 Ill. App. 259, and Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Chicago & Northern Pacific R. R., Ibid. 388, and must meet the-same fate. The reason for affirming is that the court had no jurisdiction in September to undo what it had done in May, whatever hardship it had inflicted upon the appellants.\nThe order appealed from denying the motion, is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Charles S. Miller, attorney for appellants.",
      "Cameron & Matson, attorneys for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Alexander McIntosh and Elizabeth McIntosh v. Denslow Lewis.\n1. Courts\u2014Power to Undo Past Action.\u2014In all essential particulars this case is like Angus v. Backus, 58 Ill. App. 259, and Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Chicago & Northern Pacific R. R., Ibid. 388, and must meet the same fate.\nTranscript, from a justice of the peace. Appeal from the Circuit. Cmrt of Cook County; the Hon. Edward F. Dunne, Judge, presiding\nHjard in this court at the March term, 1897.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed March 29, 1897.\nCharles S. Miller, attorney for appellants.\nCameron & Matson, attorneys for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0593-01",
  "first_page_order": 591,
  "last_page_order": 591
}