{
  "id": 5255001,
  "name": "Richard O'S. Burke v. Joseph E. Dunning",
  "name_abbreviation": "Burke v. Dunning",
  "decision_date": "1897-05-24",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "215",
  "last_page": "217",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "70 Ill. App. 215"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "15 Ill. 85",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "2 Johns. (N. Y.) 181",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Johns. Ch.",
      "case_ids": [
        1178054
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/johns-ch/2/0181-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 175,
    "char_count": 2867,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.507,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.138363859351185e-08,
      "percentile": 0.47129350012298016
    },
    "sha256": "929f9c5ece1dded2d1e73f0b26f4f2be5b3d6776ddc999956ce16d62ff0296d1",
    "simhash": "1:85e39645d853e31c",
    "word_count": 498
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:32:17.018382+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Richard O\u2019S. Burke v. Joseph E. Dunning."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nThe plaintiff in error applies for a supersedeas on a record showing that this case was commenced by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error before a justice of the peace, and tried there before a jury.\nThe transcript of the justice recites the verdict and judgment thus: \u201cWe, the jury,find the issues for the defendant and upon the verdict to the court renders judgment in favor of the defendant against the plaintiff for costs of suit.\u201d\nThe word \u201cto\u201d italicised is impertinent and must be rejected as surplusage.\nFrom that judgment the defendant in error appealed to the Circuit Court, where the plaintiff in error entered his appearance, but seems to have neglected' the case, as a copple of years afterward the defendant in error took judgment against him after an ex parte trial.\nThere is no bill of exceptions, and the point relied upon by the plaintiff in error is that the judgment merely for costs before the justice was not a final judgment, from which an appeal would lie to the Circuit Court, and therefore the Circuit Court 'had no jurisdiction.\nThat in form a final judgment for a defendant should be that the plaintiff take nothing by his suit, and that the defendant go hence without day, is not to be denied. See Sprick v. Washington Co., 3 Nebraska, 253, and authority there cited.\nBut the justice had no discretion to do anything else after that verdict than render final judgment for the defendant. Felter v. Mulliner, 2 Johns. (N. Y.) 181.\nAnd in this State, a judgment before a justice against the plaintiff for costs, without even saying in whose favor, is a final judgment. Zimmerman v. Zimmerman, 15 Ill. 85.\nThe premise on which the plaintiff in error bases his conclusion failing, his conclusion fails.\nThe supersedeas is denied.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "M. B. Gearon and D. B. Twohey, attorneys for appellant.",
      "No appearance for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Richard O\u2019S. Burke v. Joseph E. Dunning.\n1. Justices of the Peace\u2014 When Judgments by, are Final.\u2014A transcript of a justice recited a verdict and judgment as follows:' \u201c We, the jury, find the issues for the defendant, and upon the verdict the court renders judgment in favor of the defendant against the plaintiff for costs of suit.\u201d Held, that the justice had no discretion to do anything else after the verdict than render final judgment for the defendant, and that the judgment for costs should be considered a final judgment, from which an appeal would lie.\n2. Judgments\u2014Form of, When Final.\u2014In form a final judgment for a defendant should be that the plaintiff take nothing by his suit, and that the defendant go hence without day.\nTranscript, from a justice of the peace. Error to the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Charles G. Neely, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the March term, 1897.\nSupersedeas denied.\nOpinion filed May 24, 1897.\nM. B. Gearon and D. B. Twohey, attorneys for appellant.\nNo appearance for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0215-01",
  "first_page_order": 215,
  "last_page_order": 217
}