{
  "id": 2410616,
  "name": "William Rhode et al. v. Mattie McLean",
  "name_abbreviation": "Rhode v. McLean",
  "decision_date": "1881-10-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "404",
  "last_page": "405",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "9 Ill. App. 404"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 119,
    "char_count": 1092,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.542,
    "sha256": "c95a98c0a8607d2eac0d38f911db2915318b54cdc3aa26289abdeaf6ceca361c",
    "simhash": "1:5ed6edf8e59cb70b",
    "word_count": 185
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:47:09.046027+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William Rhode et al. v. Mattie McLean."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe only serious question in the case seems to have been whether the proper foundation was laid for secondary evidence of the contents of the bond. Blatter\u2019s admission was competent against him. It was not objected that while it might be competent as to him, it did not bind the others. Had this been suggested, the plaintiff could have placed Blatter on the stand, and obviated any possible difficulty. But we think Blatter\u2019s admission was competent against all; and while it belongs to the class of admissions that may be rebutted, it was prima facie enough for the purpose. 1 Gr. Ev. Sec. 174, and cases cited; Wharton on Ev. Sec. 1088-1192-1199; Cross v. Bidingfield, 35 Eng. C. R. 35.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Bell & Green and Mr. J. P. Robinson, for plaintiffs in error.",
      "Messrs. Wilson & Hutchinson and Mr. J. M. Longeneckre, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William Rhode et al. v. Mattie McLean.\nEvidence \u2014 Admissions.\u2014The court is of opinion the evidence offered was competent.\nError to the Circuit Court of Richland county; the Hon. Wm. O. Jones, Judge, presiding.\nOpinion filed October 6, 1881.\nMessrs. Bell & Green and Mr. J. P. Robinson, for plaintiffs in error.\nMessrs. Wilson & Hutchinson and Mr. J. M. Longeneckre, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0404-01",
  "first_page_order": 400,
  "last_page_order": 401
}