{
  "id": 5274150,
  "name": "George W. Wilson v. Carlinville National Bank",
  "name_abbreviation": "Wilson v. Carlinville National Bank",
  "decision_date": "1900-02-27",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "364",
  "last_page": "365",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "87 Ill. App. 364"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "78 Ill. App. 339",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5790476
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/78/0339-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 153,
    "char_count": 2082,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.581,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.71097375585372e-07,
      "percentile": 0.9498156070102929
    },
    "sha256": "8a929c16f0d9aea55489bf8b91fd2cff8483314139c01e0c6acfc23ed004e46c",
    "simhash": "1:98e206226a8a217c",
    "word_count": 356
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:29:28.737909+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "George W. Wilson v. Carlinville National Bank."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Wright\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThis case was before us at a former time and is reported as Carlinville National Bank v. Wilson, 78 Ill. App. 339. Por reasons stated in the opinion at that time the judgment of the Circuit Court was reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial. A new trial was had, in which a jury was waived, and resulted in a finding and judgment against appellant for \u00a7339, to reverse which he prosecutes this, appeal. The facts established by the evidence upon the second trial are -substantially the same- that appeared upon the first trial. Under the provision of the Appellate Court act the previous opinion filed in this cause is of binding authority herein, and however much disposed we might be to reconsider the reasons of the court for its decision expressed in that opinion, we have no right to do so. Such a practice would produce judicial chaos. That opinion and the reasons and the judgment of the court, expressed upon the same facts in the same case before us, are binding upon the parties herein and upon the court. It would be as much impertinence for us, as it would have been for the trial court, to disregard our former opinion. The case has been disposed of by the trial court in confonnity with the law as we have previously stated it, and independently of the binding authority of the former opinion, we are well satisfied with our views as therein expressed, and reaffirm the doctrine contained therein.\nThe judgment of the Circuit Court will be affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Wright"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Bell & Burton, atttorneys for appellant.",
      "Rinaker & Rinaker, attorneys for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "George W. Wilson v. Carlinville National Bank.\nl. Res Adjudicata\u2014Appellate Court Decisions.\u2014Under the provisions of the Appellate Court act the previous opinion rendered in a cause is of binding authority in the cause, not only upon the parties but upon the court.\nAssumpsit.\u2014Appeal from the Circuit Court of Macoupin County; the Hon. Owen P. Thompson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the November term, 1899.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed February 27, 1900.\nBell & Burton, atttorneys for appellant.\nRinaker & Rinaker, attorneys for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0364-01",
  "first_page_order": 370,
  "last_page_order": 371
}
