{
  "id": 5274680,
  "name": "O. G. Parsley v. Mrs. C. Halloran",
  "name_abbreviation": "Parsley v. Halloran",
  "decision_date": "1900-02-13",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "581",
  "last_page": "583",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "87 Ill. App. 581"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "62 Ill. App. 599",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        869061
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/62/0599-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "77 Ill. App. 159",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5221197
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/77/0159-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 230,
    "char_count": 3455,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.559,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.3022358842768954e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6223990278969932
    },
    "sha256": "f82a30cf628522c034fb78ff87bf607327fb1efb9b03ce659b6656a63f469b90",
    "simhash": "1:9f33ebd072e9a51a",
    "word_count": 615
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:29:28.737909+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "O. G. Parsley v. Mrs. C. Halloran."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Freeman\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n\u25a0 This was an action originally begun before a justice of the peace from whose judgment an appeal was taken to the Superior Court.\n\u25a0 The case was tried upon the \u201c short cause calendar,\u201d and the principal contention of appellant\u2019s counsel is that such trial was improper for want of compliance with the statutory requisites.\nA motion to strike the case from said \u201cshort cause calendar\u201d was denied, and the court subsequently overruled a similar motion at the time the case was called for trial.\nThe statute requires that in order to place a cause upon the \u201c short cause calendar,\u201d the plaintiff, his agent or attorney must file \u201c an affidavit that he verily believes the trial of said suit will not occupy more than one hour\u2019s time,\u201d etc. The trouble in this case is that there does not appear to have been any such original affidavit filed. The notice filed, a copy of which purports to have been left with a clerk in appellant\u2019s office, states that \u201c an affidavit of which the foregoing is a copy was duly filed in said suit.\u201d But the original of such copy does not in fact appear to have been filed. If it be true that only a copy of the affidavit is on file, the statute was not complied with and the cause was not entitled to a place on the calendar. Donnerstag v. Loewenthal, 77 Ill. App. 159. It is possible, of course, that what is by appellee\u2019s own counsel.in his affidavit of service of notice called a \u201c copy,\u201d may be in reality an original affidavit. But if so, there is no evidence of it in the record, and we may not presume that counsel did not mean what he says, when he swears it to be a copy.\nThe case was placed upon the short cause calendar pursuant to the notice and copy of the affidavit filed September 29, 1898; October 10, 1898, the cause was, on motion of the plaintiff, continued, and it was called for trial November 21,1898. The statute provides (Chap. 110, Sec. 68) that a suit upon the short cause calendar \u201c may be passed or continued for good cause shown the same as other suits; and if so passed or continued it shall lose its place upon such calendar, but may be again placed thereon.\u201d A continuance operates to remove a case from the short cause calendar audit can only be replaced thereon by filing a new affidavit and giving new notice in accordance with section 95 of the same chapter. Gudgeon v. Casey, 62 Ill. App. 599.\nThe judgment of the Superior Court is reversed and the cause remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Freeman"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Roberts & Roberts, attorneys for appellant.",
      "Francis E. Donoghue, attorney for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "O. G. Parsley v. Mrs. C. Halloran.\n1. Practice\u2014Placing Oases on the Short Cause Calendar.\u2014In order to place a case upon the \u201c short cause calendar \u201d the plaintiff, his agent or attorney, must file \u201can affidavit that he verily believes that the trial of said suit will not occupy more than one hour\u2019s time,\u201d etc.\n3. Short Cause Calendar\u2014Filing a Copy of the Affidavit Insufficient.\u2014The right to place a case on the short cause calendar and to proceed with it to trial, out of its order', according to the date of its commencement, depends entirely upon the filing of an affidavit as provided by statute; the filing of a copy of the original affidavit is not sufficient.\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Arthur H. Chetlain, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1899.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed February 13, 1900.\nRoberts & Roberts, attorneys for appellant.\nFrancis E. Donoghue, attorney for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0581-01",
  "first_page_order": 587,
  "last_page_order": 589
}