{
  "id": 5258333,
  "name": "William F. McDonald v. The Illinois Central R. R. Co. and The Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co.",
  "name_abbreviation": "McDonald v. Illinois Central R. R.",
  "decision_date": "1899-07-11",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "463",
  "last_page": "463",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "83 Ill. App. 463"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 106,
    "char_count": 1354,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.557,
    "sha256": "93537409e3df59afb822497b3f51fd33721fb176c3e0fc5b0be5462ce80cc0b7",
    "simhash": "1:f520b925abbe3294",
    "word_count": 229
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:22:35.373210+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William F. McDonald v. The Illinois Central R. R. Co. and The Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nMr. Justice Horton could not participate in the consideration and decision of this cause by reason of his relations with one of the counsel for plaintiff in error.\nThe remaining justices are unable to agree, and the judgment must therefore be affirmed by a divided court. No opinion can therefore be filed. Affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "William J. Strong, attorney for plaintiff in error.",
      "C. V. Gwin, attorney for Illinois Central R. R. Co.; James Fentress, of counsel.",
      "E. E. Osborn, attorney for Chicago & North Western Railway Company; A. W. Pulver and Lloyd W. Bowers, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William F. McDonald v. The Illinois Central R. R. Co. and The Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co.\n1. Appellate Court Practice \u2014Where the Justices Are Unable to Agree.\u2014Where one of the justices of the Appellate Court can not participate in the consideration and decision of a cause by reason of his relations with the counsel for one of the parties, and the remaining justices are unable to agree, the judgment will be affirmed by a divided court.\nAction for a Conspiracy.\u2014Trial in the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. George W. Brown, Judge, presiding. Judgment for defendants on demurrer to the-declaration; plaintiff abides by his declaration and brings error. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1899.\nAffirmed by a divided court.\n' Opinion filed July 11, 1899.\nWilliam J. Strong, attorney for plaintiff in error.\nC. V. Gwin, attorney for Illinois Central R. R. Co.; James Fentress, of counsel.\nE. E. Osborn, attorney for Chicago & North Western Railway Company; A. W. Pulver and Lloyd W. Bowers, of counsel."
  },
  "file_name": "0463-01",
  "first_page_order": 467,
  "last_page_order": 467
}